United States v. Naranjo
District Court, District of Columbia
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Thomas F. Hogan, Senior United States District Judge
Pending before the Court are Defendant Jose Naranjo’s pro se Motion Under Rule 60(b); Alternatively 59(e) [ECF No. 611] (“Rule 60(b) Motion”) and pro se Motion to Vacate Judgment of Conviction “Writ of Error” Under Title 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a), “The All Writs Act” [ECF No. 618] (“Motion to Vacate Judgment of Conviction”). As explained below, this Court finds that Naranjo is not entitled to relief under Rules 60(b) or 59(e) so his Rule 60(b) Motion will be denied. Naranjo’s Motion to Vacate Judgment of Conviction will be…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Slack v. McDanielSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- United States v. AkersDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2007
- United States v. Naranjo, JoseCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2001
- United States v. TchibassaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2011