Opinion
02 Civ. 1056 (LAK)
September 26, 2002
ORDER
Petitioner moves for reconsideration of this Court's order, dated September 3, 2002, which dismissed the petition as untimely. He contends that the Court overlooked the appeal from the denial of his Section 440.10 motion in the state courts, which extended the period during which the prescriptive period was tolled.
Petitioner is correct. The motion for reconsideration is granted and, on reconsideration, the Court determines that the petition is timely. The September 3, 2002 order therefore is vacated and the petition reinstated.
SO ORDERED.