District Judge Richard J. Arcara

 

Read Full- Text Decision

On Oct. 19, 2016 the Hon. Michael J. Telesca granted petitioner Clark §2255 relief and transferred his case to the instant court for resentencing. Given that the legality of Clark’s original sentence, and any new sentence, turned on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Beckles v. U.S., the court declined to immediately resentence Clark. Rather, it issued two orders staying resentencing proceedings until Beckles is decided. Although the Supreme Court decided Beckles on March 6, 2017 petitioner Clark has not yet been resentenced. The instant court determined that it held authority to reconsider Judge Telesca’s interlocutory Oct. 19, 2016, decision and order, and that the government’s motion for reconsideration thereof was timely filed. The government promptly and diligently sought reconsideration after Beckles, the basis for its motion, was decided by the Supreme Court on March 6, 2017. In light of Beckles, it appeared that Judge Telesca’s interlocutory Oct. 19, 2016, decision and order should be vacated, and Clark’s petition for §2255 relief should be denied. Clark was directed to file a brief before May 8 addressing whether any grounds remain for granting his §2255 petition in light of Beckles.

District Judge Richard J. Arcara

 

Read Full- Text Decision

On Oct. 19, 2016 the Hon. Michael J. Telesca granted petitioner Clark §2255 relief and transferred his case to the instant court for resentencing. Given that the legality of Clark’s original sentence, and any new sentence, turned on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Beckles v. U.S., the court declined to immediately resentence Clark. Rather, it issued two orders staying resentencing proceedings until Beckles is decided. Although the Supreme Court decided Beckles on March 6, 2017 petitioner Clark has not yet been resentenced. The instant court determined that it held authority to reconsider Judge Telesca’s interlocutory Oct. 19, 2016, decision and order, and that the government’s motion for reconsideration thereof was timely filed. The government promptly and diligently sought reconsideration after Beckles, the basis for its motion, was decided by the Supreme Court on March 6, 2017. In light of Beckles, it appeared that Judge Telesca’s interlocutory Oct. 19, 2016, decision and order should be vacated, and Clark’s petition for §2255 relief should be denied. Clark was directed to file a brief before May 8 addressing whether any grounds remain for granting his §2255 petition in light of Beckles.