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.

United States v. House

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS URBANA DIVISION


April 9, 2007

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
PAUL J. HOUSE, III, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Michael P. McCUSKEY Chief U.S. District Judge

OPINION

On April 4, 2007, Defendant, Paul J. House, filed a Petition for a Rule 35 Correction of Sentence (#23). Defendant wants this court to correct the amount of restitution he was ordered to pay.

Rule 35 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure provides that "[w]ithin 7 days after sentencing, the court may correct a sentence that resulted from arithmetical, technical, or other clear error." Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(a). Rule 45(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure states that the "court may not extend the time to take any action under Rule 35, except as stated in that rule." Fed. R. Crim. P. 45(b)(2). There is no provision in Rule 35 for an extension of the seven-day period for correcting a sentence. United States v. Baldwin, 414 F.3d 791, 797 (7th Cir. 2005). In this case, Defendant was sentenced on April 8, 2004, and an Order setting the amount of restitution was entered on June 4, 2004. The seven-day period has long since passed and this court therefore has no authority to correct Defendant's sentence. See Baldwin, 414 F.3d at 797.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT Defendant's Petition for a Rule 35 Correction of Sentence (#23) is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

ENTERED this 9th day of April, 2007

20070409

© 1992-2007 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.