Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Duran v. Reno

197 F.3d 63

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1999-10-25
Topic
general

In an opinion dated September 20, 1999, we granted appellant’s motion for the appointment of counsel on appeal from the district court’s (Griesa, Chief Judge) dismissal of appellant’s habeas corpus petition, and ordered that counsel shall be appointed pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act (“CJA”), 18 U.S.C. § B006A. See Duran v. Reno, 193 F.3d 82, 83-84 (2d Cir. 1999). The government thereafter moved to modify that portion of the opinion appointing counsel under the CJA. The government now informs us, however, that appellant was deported from the United States on February 23, 1999 and that no stay of deportation was in effect at the time appellant was deported.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Duran v. Reno. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
6 opinions
DURAN v. RENO,197 F.3d 63(2nd Cir. 1999)
ALBERTO DURAN, PETITIONER-APPELLANT, v. JANET RENO, ET AL.,
RESPONDENTS-APPELLEES
No. 98-2715
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
October 25, 1999
Present: HONORABLE RALPH K. WINTER, Chief Judge, JANE A. RESTANI,fn*Judge, MICHAEL B. MUKASEY,fn**District Judge,fn***
[1] In an opinion dated September 20, 1999, we granted appellant's motion for the appointment of counsel on appeal from the district court's (Griesa,Chief Judge) dismissal of appellant's habeas corpus petition, and ordered that counsel shall be appointed pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act ("CJA"),18 U.S.C. § 3006A.See Duran v. Reno,193 F.3d 82, 83-84 (2d. Cir. 1999). The government thereafter moved to modify that portion of the opinion appointing counsel under the CJA. The government now informs us, however, that appellant was deported from the United States on February 23, 1999 and that no stay of deportation was in effect at the time appellant was deported. We thus have no jurisdiction over appellant's appeal. Accordingly, it is ordered that said appeal be and it hereby is dismissed, and the September 20, 1999 opinion is vacated as moot.Page 578
  1. The Honorable Jane A. Restani, of the United States Court of International Trade, sitting by designation. ↩
  2. The Honorable Michael B. Mukasey, of the United States District Court for the Southern district of New York, sitting by designation. ↩
  3. Pursuant to28 U.S.C. § 46(b) and an order of the Chief Judge of this Court certifying a judicial emergency, this case was heard by a panel consisting of the Chief Judge of this Court, one judge of the United States District Court sitting by designation, and one judge of the United States Court of International Trade sitting by designation. ↩