Celestino v. United States of America
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: denying re: 6 MOTION for Reconsideration filed by Miladys Celestino. Celestinos motion does not attack the holding that her § 2255 petition was time-barred. Rather, it attacks her underlying sentence. It is thus beyond the scope of a motion for reconsideration and is accordingly denied, and as further set forth in this document. (Signed by Judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum on 10/4/2012) (cd)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-against11 Civ. 4651 (MGC)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
On June 6, 2011, Miladys Celestino placed a petition for a
writ of error coram nobis in the prison mail collection box.
October 14, 2011, I construed Celestino’s application as a
motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and directed petitioner to show
cause by affirmation within sixty days why the application was
Celestino was also given sixty days to notify
me in writing if she wished to withdraw the application.
denied the petition as time-barred on May 11, 2012.
now moves for reconsideration of the denial of her prior
She asserts that she suffered prejudice because
counsel failed to assist her in obtaining a plea offer.
Celestino’s motion does not attack the holding that her
§ 2255 petition was time-barred.
Rather, it attacks her
It is thus beyond the scope of a motion
for reconsideration and is accordingly denied.
See Gitten v.
United States, 311 F.3d 529, 534 (2d Cir. 2002).
Celestino has not satisfied the standard for reconsideration,
which may properly be granted only when the moving party can
show that the court has “overlooked matters or controlling
decisions which, had they been considered, might reasonably have
altered the result.”
Donahue v. Pendleton Woolen Mills, Inc.,
719 F. Supp. 149, 151 (S.D.N.Y. 1988) (citations and internal
quotation marks omitted).
Since Celestino has not made a substantial showing of the
denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability
will not issue.
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c).
I certify pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be
taken in good faith.
New York, New York
October 4, 2012
MIRIAM GOLDMAN CEDARBAUM
United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?