From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Bifulco

United States District Court, W.D. New York
Sep 14, 2006
01-CR-192A (W.D.N.Y. Sep. 14, 2006)

Opinion

01-CR-192A.

September 14, 2006


DECISION AND ORDER


Currently before the Court is defendant Frank J. "Butchie" Bifulco's motion to take depositions to perpetuate testimony, pursuant to Rule 27 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendant states that he intends on filing a motion to set aside his sentence, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, on or before October 11, 2006. He seeks to take the depositions of two of the witnesses that testified against him at trial: Elizabeth Tata and Angelo Albert. The government opposes defendant's motion.

The Court finds that the defendant's motion must be denied. Defendant has failed to offer an adequate explanation as to why he is presently unable to bring his § 2255 motion. Nor has the defendant offered an adequate explanation as to why the individuals he seeks to depose will be any less available after he files his § 2255 motion. For example, he does not allege that they are near death or are in danger of becoming incapacitated in the near future.

Accordingly, the Court denies defendant's motion to take depositions to perpetuate testimony.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Bifulco

United States District Court, W.D. New York
Sep 14, 2006
01-CR-192A (W.D.N.Y. Sep. 14, 2006)
Case details for

U.S. v. Bifulco

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. FRANK J. "BUTCHIE" BIFULCO, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, W.D. New York

Date published: Sep 14, 2006

Citations

01-CR-192A (W.D.N.Y. Sep. 14, 2006)

Citing Cases

U.S. v. Bifulco

He points to the Circuit Court's sua sponte statement that, "[w]hile Bifulco would be entitled to a Crosby…