Antonetti v. United States of America
Filing
10
ORDER: Therefore, it is Ordered that: The Court appoints CJA counsel on duty August 10, 2020, David A. Ruhnke, for the purpose of advising Petitioner in advance of and during resentencing. The parties shall appear for a hearing on Octobe r 20, 2020, at which time the Government will consent to the vacatur of the § 924(c) charge and the Court will resentence Petitioner on the remaining counts of conviction. A Supplemental Presentence Investigation Report is due to the Court o n October 6, 2020. Any sentencing submissions by Petitioner must be made by October 12, 2020, and must state specifically whether Petitioner contests any fact in the Supplemental Pre-sentence Investigation Report, and whether Petitioner contests the appropriateness of the Probation Officer's Sentencing Recommendation. Probation should contact Chambers if they experience difficulty in scheduling the pre-sentence interview, or if the Supplemental PSR will not be completed in a timely fashion. Any response or other submission from the Government is due October 16, 2020. SO ORDERED. Attorney David Arthur Ruhnke for Jose Antonetti added. (Signed by Judge Kimba M. Wood on 8/10/2020) (va)
Case 1:18-cv-07239-KMW Document 10 Filed 08/10/20 Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
--------------------------------------------------------X
USDC SDNY
DOCUMENT
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
DOC #: __________________
DATE FILED: August 10, 2020
JOSE ANTONETTI,
Petitioner,
02-CR-1232 (KMW)
18-CV-7239 (KMW)
-against-
ORDER
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent.
--------------------------------------------------------X
KIMBA M. WOOD, United States District Judge:
On October 29, 2003, Petitioner Jose Antonetti pleaded guilty to two counts of conspiracy
to commit Hobbs Act robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951, and one count of brandishing a
firearm during a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), predicated on one of the
Hobbs Act conspiracy charges.
Petitioner was sentenced to 77 months’ imprisonment on the
Hobbs Act conspiracies and 84 months’ imprisonment on the § 924(c) charge, to be served
consecutively.
Petitioner, proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 2255.
(ECF No. 47 1.)
On September 30, 2019, Petitioner filed a supplemental
brief, in which he argued that his conviction on the § 924(c) charge could not stand under the
Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Davis, 139 S. Ct. 2319 (2019).
(ECF No. 59.)
On August 3, 2020, the Government informed the Court that it agrees with Petitioner that his
conviction on the § 924(c) charge is invalid under Davis.
(ECF No. 62.)
Therefore, it is Ordered that:
1
All references to Petitioner’s electronic docket refer to Petitioner’s criminal docket.
Case 1:18-cv-07239-KMW Document 10 Filed 08/10/20 Page 2 of 2
The Court appoints CJA counsel on duty August 10, 2020, David A. Ruhnke, for the
purpose of advising Petitioner in advance of and during resentencing.
The parties shall appear for a hearing on October 20, 2020, at which time the Government
will consent to the vacatur of the § 924(c) charge and the Court will resentence Petitioner on the
remaining counts of conviction.
A Supplemental Presentence Investigation Report is due to the Court on October 6, 2020.
Any sentencing submissions by Petitioner must be made by October 12, 2020, and must
state specifically whether Petitioner contests any fact in the Supplemental Presentence
Investigation Report, and whether Petitioner contests the appropriateness of the Probation
Officer’s Sentencing Recommendation.
Probation should contact Chambers if they experience difficulty in scheduling the
presentence interview, or if the Supplemental PSR will not be completed in a timely fashion.
Any response or other submission from the Government is due October 16, 2020.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: New York, New York
August 10, 2020
/s/ Kimba M. Wood
KIMBA M. WOOD
United States District Judge
2
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?