IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
June 23, 2010
SAMUEL HOGSETT, JR., PETITIONER/DEFENDANT,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: William D. Stiehl District Judge
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
STIEHL, District Judge
This matter is before the Court on Petitioner's motion for relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Also before the Court are Petitioner's first and second motions to amend his § 2255 motion (Docs.3 and 5). Petitioner's second amended § 2255 motion appears to supersede and replace his first proposed amended motion (and his original motion). Accordingly, Petitioner's second motion to amend his § 2255 motion (Doc. 5) is GRANTED and his first motion to amend his § 2255 motion is DENIED as moot.
Petitioner was found guilty, after a jury trial, of being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(e); possession with intent to distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1); and possession of a firearm during and in relation to a drug-trafficking crime in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). On April 20, 2007, Petitioner was sentenced to 355 months imprisonment, 5 years supervised release, a fine of $750.00, and a special assessment of $300. Petitioner filed a direct appeal, but his conviction was affirmed by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. United States v. Hogsett, Jr., No. 07-1939 (7th Cir., affirming district court April 3, 2008). Petitioner sought, but was denied a petition for a writ of certiorari from the Supreme Court of the United States. Hogsett v. United States, 129 S.Ct. 1308 (2009).
In his amended motion, the Petitioner raises several grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel.
The Court ORDERS the Government to file a response to Petitioner's amended 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.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.