Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

U.S. v. TRAEGER

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division


August 10, 2004.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
ANDREW TRAEGER, Defendant.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: MILTON SHADUR, Senior District Judge

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Andrew Traeger ("Traeger"), like the Energizer Bunny, keeps going and going and going. Since this Court most recently issued its short July 20, 2004 memorandum order denying reconsideration of its July 8 memorandum opinion and order that had denied Traeger's 28 U.S.C. § 2255*fn1 motion, it has received two more filings from Traeger, respectively captioned "Motion To Leave For Reconsideration of the Court's Memorandum Opinion and Order" and "Motion To Leave For This Court To Consider Jurisdiction of the Indictment."

It seems quite certain that the first of those filings and this Court's July 20 memorandum order crossed in the mails: Although the motion did not arrive in the Clerk's Office until July 26, Traeger's notice of filing states that he placed the document in the legal mailbox at his Terre Haute place of confinement on July 16. In any event, nothing said in that initial motion calls for further reconsideration, so the motion is denied.

  As for the second and more recent filing, it does not come within the purview of this Court except as a potential Section 2255 motion. But under the Supreme Court's teaching, this Court cannot sua sponte relabel the motion as one filed under Section 2255 — and if Traeger were to seek to do so, Section 2244(b)(3)(A) requires that he must move in the first instance in our Court of Appeals for an order authorizing this District Court to consider the application.

  Accordingly both motions are denied. As indicated in the preceding paragraph, however, such denial as to the second filing is without prejudice to Traeger's ability to seek leave from the Court of Appeals to proceed with a second Section 2255 motion.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.