Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Lespier v. United States

United States District Court, D. Connecticut

October 4, 2017

RICHARD LESPIER, Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.

          RULING AND ORDER

          Robert N. Chatigny, United States District Judge

         Petitioner Richard Lespier brings this action pro se under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 challenging his conviction and sentence for murder in aid of racketeering in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(1). The Government moves to dismiss the petition, arguing that petitioner's claims are untimely and without merit. For reasons that follow, the petition is dismissed.

         I. Background

         In 1998, petitioner was indicted for murder in aid of racketeering. See United States v. Lespier, 3: 98-cr-102 (AHN). He was found guilty by a jury and sentenced to life imorisonment, as required by § 1959(a)(1). The Second Circuit affirmed the judgment. United States v. Adorno, 5 Fed.Appx. 65, 65 (2d Cir. 2001)(summary order). A motion for a new trial was denied.

         On March 16, 2009, petitioner moved to set aside the judgment and dismiss the indictment. Lespier v. United States, 3:09-cv-549 (RNC). The motion was denied. Petitioner moved to reopen the case to file a notice of appeal. The Court denied this motion on January 26, 2011, and petitioner filed a notice of appeal. The Second Circuit granted the Government's motion for summary affirmance on December 1, 2011. Lespier v. United States, No. 11-498 (2d Cir. Dec 1, 2011).

         On November 26, 2013, petitioner filed a motion in the Second Circuit for leave to file a successive petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, which the Court denied. Lespier v. United States, No. 13-4461 (2d Cir. Dec 26, 2013).

         On March 28, 2014, petitioner filed the present action claiming his sentence was enhanced based on facts not found by the jury in violation of Alleyne v. United States, 133 S.Ct. 2151 (2013). On February 17, 2015, petitioner amended the petition to add claims alleging that he was deprived of his right to effective assistance of counsel.

         II. Discussion

         Section 2255(f)[1] requires that a federal habeas petitioner file his petition within one year from the latest of:

(1) the date on which the judgment of conviction becomes final;
(2) the date on which the impediment to making a motion created by governmental action in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States is removed, if the movant was prevented from making a motion by such governmental action;
(3) the date on which the right asserted was initially recognized by the Supreme Court, if that right has been newly recognized by the Supreme Court and made retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review; or
(4) the date on which the facts supporting the claim or claims presented could have been discovered through the exercise of due diligence.

         Petitioner filed his claim more than a decade after his conviction became final. He does not allege any facts supporting his claims that could not have been ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.