Legrano v. United States, 022613 FED2, 11-3936
|Party Name:||JOSEPH LEGRANO, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent-Appellee.|
|Attorney:||For Appellant: Joseph Legrano, pro se, Ayer, MA. For Appellee: David C. James and Darren LaVerne, Assistant United States Attorneys, for Loretta E. Lynch, United States Attorney, Eastern District of New York, Brooklyn, NY.|
|Judge Panel:||Present: JOHN M. WALKER, JR., ROBERT A. KATZMANN, Circuit Judges, LORETTA A. PRESKA, District Judge.|
|Case Date:||February 26, 2013|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit|
RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT'S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION "SUMMARY ORDER"). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.
At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 26th day of February, two thousand thirteen.
Appeal from orders of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Ross, A.).
UPON DUE CONSIDERATION it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that the orders of the district court are AFFIRMED.
Appellant Joseph Legrano, incarcerated and proceeding pro se, appeals from the district court's orders denying his petition for a writ of audita querela or coram nobis under the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a), and his motion for reconsideration of that denial. We assume the parties' familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history of the case, and the issues on appeal.
We review de novo a district court's denial of a writ of audita querela. United States v. Richter, 510 F.3d 103, 104 (2d Cir. 2007) (per curiam). Additionally, we review the denial of a writ of error coram nobis for abuse of discretion, but conduct a de novo review with respect to whether the district court applied the proper legal standard. United States v. Mandanici, 205 F.3d 519, 524 (2d Cir. 2000). "The All Writs Act is a residual source of authority to issue writs that are not...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP