UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
November 15, 2010
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
ESTON THOMAS, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: J. Phil Gilbert District Judge
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Eston Thomas' pro se Motion for Reduction of Sentence Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582 and Motion to Appoint Counsel (Doc. 325). As a preliminary matter, the Court notes that Thomas makes no mention of a request for reduction apart from the mere titling of her motion. Due to such insufficient factual and legal support, the Court DENIES Thomas' motion for reduction.
On February 23, 2010, Thomas filed a Notice of Appeal (Doc. 316) in this Court. Specifically, Thomas sought to appeal from the Court's Order (Doc. 315) of February 17, which granted Thomas' pro se Motion for Reduction of Sentence (Doc. 301) pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582 and reduced Thomas' sentence from 360 months to 324 months imprisonment. The case currently remains with the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals (Case No. 10-1441).
"The filing of a notice of appeal is an event of jurisdictional significance - it confers jurisdiction on the court of appeals and divests the district court of its control over those aspects of the case involved in the appeal." United States v. Ali, 619 F.3d 713, 722 (7th Cir. 2010) (citing Griggs v. Provident Consumer Disc. Co., 459 U.S. 56, 58 (1982)).
Here, Thomas' filing of a notice of appeal has divested the Court of jurisdiction. Accordingly, the Court has no choice but to DISMISS Thomas' motion to appoint counsel.*fn1
For the foregoing reasons, the Court DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to TERMINATE the instant motions (Doc. 325).
IT IS SO ORDERED.