X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
http://nycourts.law.com/CourtDocumentViewer.asp?view=Document&docID=51679 Judge Platt PETITIONER MOVED to vacate his conviction and sentence under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(2) upon discovery of new evidence in the form of a copy of a letter to his attorney of a plea offer never communicated to him. The parties sustantively agreed that petitioner’s challenges must be re-examined, but disagreed as to procedure. The Government proposed 28 USC �2244. Rule 60 motions, the court found, are to be made within one year after a judgment and petitioner was convicted and sentenced 15 years ago. It noted that �2244 pertains to state court convictions and to discovery of facts that would show petitioner is not guilty of the underlying offense, when he was convicted in federal court and there is no evidence that he is not guilty of underlying offenses. The court found that without an exception, petitioner is caught in a procedural “Catch-22″ that prevents his claim from being heard despite discovery of new evidence. It granted petitioner an evidentiary hearing under Rule 60.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 3 articles* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.