Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Lopez v. United States, 11 Cr. 1032-62 (PAE). (2020)

Court: District Court, S.D. New York Number: infdco20200203e04 Visitors: 20
Filed: Jan. 30, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 30, 2020
Summary: ORDER PAUL A. ENGELMAYER , District Judge . The Court has reviewed the pro se petition of Julian Lopez, filed December 19, 2019, to vacate the judgment in this case. Dkt. 2467 ("Pet."). Lopez was among 76 defendants charged with racketeering and/or related offenses in connection with their participation in the violent Bronx Trinitarios Gang. On December 18, 2013, Lopez pled guilty to Count One of the superseding indictment in this case, S5 11 Cr. 1032 (PAE), charging him with participatin
More

ORDER

The Court has reviewed the pro se petition of Julian Lopez, filed December 19, 2019, to vacate the judgment in this case. Dkt. 2467 ("Pet."). Lopez was among 76 defendants charged with racketeering and/or related offenses in connection with their participation in the violent Bronx Trinitarios Gang. On December 18, 2013, Lopez pled guilty to Count One of the superseding indictment in this case, S5 11 Cr. 1032 (PAE), charging him with participating in a racketeering enterprise in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c). See Dkt. 951 ("Plea Tr.") at 7-18. On May 9, 2014, the Court sentenced Lopez to a term of 180 months imprisonment, within the advisory Guidelines range (168 to 210 months imprisonment) that the parties had calculated and which the Court independently found applicable. See Dkt. 1183 ("Sentencing Tr.") at 38. Lopez did not appeal.

Lopez's motion claims that the Court (1) lacked subject matter jurisdiction over his case, (2) denied Lopez his due process rights under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, (3) denied Lopez his right to attend the grand jury selection process, and (4) subjected him to arbitrary arrest. See generally Pet. These claims are conclusory and frivolous. The Court summarily denies them.

The Court therefore denies Lopez's petition for relief. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motion pending at docket 2467. Lopez's case remains closed.

The Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability and certifies that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith; therefore, in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 445 (1962).

SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer