IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS SPRINGFIELD DIVISION
May 10, 2010
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
ROBERT BLUNTSON, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Jeanne E. Scott, U.S. District Judge
The Court is in receipt of a pro se filing by Defendant Bluntson entitled "Impeachment of the Congressionally Enacted Disparte Ratio of 100:1 Between Crack Cocaine and Cocaine Powder and the Unconstitutional Federal Sentencing Law," which the Clerk is directed to docket. The Court intends to construe this document as a Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
In Castro v. United States, the Supreme Court directed that when a Court construes a pro se petitioner's pleading as a first motion pursuant to § 2255, the Court must "notify the pro se litigant that it intends to recharacterize the pleading, warn the litigant that this recharacterization means that any subsequent § 2255 motion will be subject to the restrictions on 'second or successive' motions, and provide the litigant an opportunity to withdraw the motion or to amend it so that it contains all the § 2255 claims he believes he has." Castro, 540 U.S. 375, 383 (2003). Bluntson is hereby placed on notice of the Court's intent to construe his filing as an initial § 2255 motion. If this is not Bluntson's desire, he may voluntarily withdraw the pleading by filing a motion to withdraw with the Court on or before June 11, 2010. If he does not withdraw the pleading, Bluntson should file a supplemental pleading which includes any additional § 2255 claims that he believes he has on or before June 11, 2010. After that date, the Court will recharacterize Bluntson's filing as a § 2255 motion and open a § 2255 case.
IT IS THEREFORE SO ORDERED.
ENTER: May 7, 2010
JEANNE E. SCOTT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.