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.

United States v. Figueroa

United States District Court, D. Rhode Island

December 14, 2018

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
ERVIN FIGUEROA

          ORDER

          WILLIAM E. SMITH, Chief Judge.

         This matter is before the Court on a Motion for Summary Acquittal for Want of Due Process and Multiple Constitutional Violations (“Motion, ” ECF No. 324) filed by Defendant Ervin Figueroa pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(3). For the following reasons, the Motion is DENIED.

         I. Background [1]

         In 2008, Defendant Ervin Figueroa and five other individuals were arrested and subsequently indicted on a number of conspiracy, drug, firearms, and money laundering charges. Several defendants pled guilty to the charges, but Figuera and two others elected a trial. Following an eight-day jury trial, Figueroa was found guilty of sixteen counts of the Superceding Indictment. He was sentenced on June 2, 2011 to a term of imprisonment of 188 months as to all counts to run concurrently, followed by five years of supervised release. Judgment entered on June 14, 2011.

         The First Circuit affirmed the judgment on January 30, 2013, and subsequently denied Figueroa's motion for rehearing and rehearing en banc. The appellate court's Mandate issued on March 5, 2013. On October 9, 2013, the Supreme Court denied Figueroa's petition for a writ of certiorari.

         Figueroa subsequently filed a motion for sentence reduction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) based on Amendment 782 to the United States Sentencing Guidelines. (See ECF No. 290.) The Court granted the motion and reduced Figueroa's term of imprisonment to 151 months. (See ECF No. 303.)

         Figueroa filed the instant Motion on October 24, 2017.[2]II. Discussion Figueroa brings his Motion pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(3), alleging “after-the-fact” fraud on the Court. (Mot. at 1.) Rule 60(b) provides:

On motion and just terms, the court may relieve a party or its legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons:
(1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect;
(2) newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59(b);
(3) fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party;
(4) the judgment is void;
(5) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged; it is based on an earlier judgment that has been reversed or vacated; or applying it ...

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.