Opinion
15 Cr. 174-05 (LGS)
04-14-2020
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. CARLOS JOSE ZAVALA VELASQUEZ, Defendant
ORDER
:
WHEREAS, on April 2, 2020, Defendant mailed to the Court a letter request for an extension of time to file a motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The letter was filed on the docket on April 10, 2020 (Dkt. No. 435). It is hereby
ORDERED that Defendant's request for an extension is DENIED. Unfortunately, the Court has no authority to grant the requested extension. "[A] district court may grant an extension of time to file a motion pursuant to section 2255 only if (1) the moving party requests the extension upon or after filing an actual section 2255 motion, and (2) 'rare and exceptional' circumstances warrant equitably tolling the limitations period." Green v. United States, 260 F.3d 78, 82-83 (2d Cir. 2001). Neither of these conditions are satisfied here. Also, "a federal court lacks jurisdiction to consider the timeliness of a § 2255 petition until a petition is actually filed." Id. at 82; accord United States v. Rudge, No. 16 Cr. 311, 2019 WL 4867828, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 18, 2019) (denying request for extension to file a 2255 petition and observing that, "[w]here a movant has not yet filed a section 2255 petition, there is no underlying case or controversy and an opinion regarding timeliness would be merely advisory."). Defendant has not yet filed his petition.
The Court may not construe Defendant's letter request as a substantive motion for relief (i.e., the petition), because the Court may only do so where "the filing specif[ies] all the grounds for relief which are available to the movant and of which he has or, by the exercise of reasonable diligence, should have knowledge and shall set forth in summary form the facts supporting each of the grounds thus specified." Green, 260 F.3d at 83; accord Rone v. United States, No. 12 Cr. 480-3, 2015 WL 12999721, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 11, 2015) ("The Court cannot act on Rone's submission because he asserts no substantive habeas grounds. Even considered liberally, Rone's letter does not refer to any basis in law or fact which would entitle him to relief under § 2255."). Here, Defendant's letter does not provide facts supporting the legal grounds specified. It is further
ORDERED that the Government shall serve this Order on Defendant, and file proof of service, by April 17, 2020. Dated: April 14, 2020
New York, New York
/s/ _________
LORNA G. SCHOFIELD
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Liliana Rusansky Drob, Psy.D.
Clinical and Forensic Psychology
465 Bay Ridge Pkwy
Brooklyn, New York 11209
P: 646-262-7834
Fax: 718 732-0043
lilidrob@gmail.com
February 4, 2020
For Professional Services
Re: United States District Court vs Ludwig Criss Zelaya Romero
Indictment#: S1 15 Cr. 174 (LGS)
| Date | Procedure | Hours |
|---|---|---|
| 11-12-19 | Consultation with Court Clerk | 0.30 |
| 11-18-19 | Review of legal records | 0.50 |
| 12-03-19 | Review of Neuropsychological Assessment | 0.50 |
| 12-16-19 | Psychological Examination at MetropolitanDetention Center | 6.00 |
| 12-16-19 | Travel to MDC from Bklyn Hts Office | 0.80 |
| 12-18-19 | Intellectual functioning and Trauma assessment | 3.00 |
| 12-18-19 | Travel to MDC from Bklyn Hts Office | 0.80 |
| 01-15-20 | Psychological Examination at MDC | 3.00 |
| 01-15-20 | Travel to MDC from Bklyn Hts Office | 0.80 |
| 01-17-20 | Data Entry, Scoring and Interpretationof psychological tests | 3.10 |
| 01-20-20 | Forensic Psychological Report | 7.20 |
| 01-23-20 | Forensic Psychological Report | 3.20 |
| 01-30-30 | Forensic Psychological Report | 2.90 |
Total = 32.1 hrs. at $250.00/hr. = $ 8,025.00
Please remit: $ 8,025.00 at the above address.
Liliana Rusansky Drob
NYS License #: 015764
TIN #: 591-32-6145