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.

Stallings v. United States

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS


April 20, 2006

BRETT A. STALLINGS, PETITIONER/DEFENDANT,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Stiehl, District Judge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Petitioner's motion for relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. On December 11, 2003, petitioner was found guilty of being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(e)(1). On November 19, 2004, Petitioner was sentenced to 188 months imprisonment, five years supervised release, a fine of $200, and a special assessment of $100. On appeal, Petitioner argued that there was insufficient evidence to convict him of the offense and that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Both of these arguments were rejected and Petitioner's conviction and sentence were affirmed by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals on December 16, 2005. Petitioner filed the instant motion under section 2255 on February 14, 2006.

In his motion the Petitioner raises the following six grounds for relief: 1) that the indictment and conviction were "structurally deficient to sustain the sentence," 2) that he received insufficient notice that his sentence would be enhanced based on prior convictions, 3) that, pursuant to Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S. 13 (2005), one of the prior convictions used to enhance his sentence was a non-violent offense, 4) that he was sentenced, improperly, under the Sentencing Guidelines, 5) that he was not notified that a prior offense could have the effect of enhancing a future sentence for use of a firearm, and 6) that he received ineffective assistance of counsel.

The Court ORDERS the Government to file a response to Petitioner's motion within THIRTY (30) DAYS of the date of this Order. The Government shall, as part of its response, attach all relevant portions of the record.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

WILLIAM D. STIEHL DISTRICT JUDGE

20060420

© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.



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.