Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

motion
motion

Related Cases

Bait It v. McAleenan
View Case »
Mufti v. Lynch
View Case »
Roth v. Islamic Republic of Iran
View Case »
Tittjung v. Reno
View Case »
Osei v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

U.S. v. Guzman

Facts

Montoya Guzman has filed a motion for reconsideration pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P., Rule 60(b), asking the Court to reverse its decision denying his motion to vacate his convictions pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255. This is the third motion for reconsideration Montoya Guzman has filed in his unsuccessful quest to get the Court to reverse its decision denying his 2255 motion.

Montoya Guzman has filed a motion for reconsideration pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P., Rule 60(b), asking the Court to reverse its decision denying his motion to vacate his convictions pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255.

Issue

Whether the court should grant Montoya Guzman's motion for reconsideration of its previous decision denying his motion to vacate his convictions.

Whether the court should grant Montoya Guzman's motion for reconsideration of its previous decision denying his motion to vacate his convictions.

Rule

The court applied Fed. R. Civ. P., Rule 60(b) and 28 U.S.C. 2255 in determining whether to grant the motion for reconsideration.

The court applied Fed. R. Civ. P., Rule 60(b) and 28 U.S.C. 2255 in determining whether to grant the motion for reconsideration.

Analysis

The court found that Montoya Guzman's latest motion essentially reiterates previous arguments that had already been considered and rejected. There was nothing in the present motion that suggested the court should alter its decision denying his habeas petition.

The court found that Montoya Guzman's latest motion essentially reiterates previous arguments that had already been considered and rejected.

Conclusion

Accordingly, petitioner's motion for relief from the Court's March 13, 2019 decision denying his 2255 motion is denied.

Accordingly, petitioner's motion for relief from the Court's March 13, 2019 decision denying his 2255 motion is denied.

Who won?

The United States prevailed in the case because the court found no basis to alter its previous decision denying Guzman's motion.

The United States prevailed in the case because the court found no basis to alter its previous decision denying Guzman's motion.

You must be