IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
April 4, 2012
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
RAY LEGG, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Stiehl, District Judge:
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Before the Court is defendant's motion to for an order to reopen his case under a writ of audita querela pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1651 (Doc. 630) which he has filed in his criminal case. As the Seventh Circuit noted in Vitrano v. United States, 643 F.3d 229, 233 (7th Cir. 2011):
Any motion filed in the district court that imposed sentence, and substantively within the scope of § 2255, is a motion under § 2255, no matter what title the prisoner plasters on the cover. Call it a motion for a new trial, arrest of judgment, mandamus, prohibition, coram nobis, coram vobis, audita querela, certiorari, capias, habeas corpus, ejectment, quare impedit, bill of review, writ of error, or an application for a Get--Out--of--Jail Card; the name makes no difference. It is substance that controls.
In this case, the defendant previously filed a motion for habeas relief, see, Legg v. United States, 00-CV-163-WDS which was dismissed in 2001. He cannot now file a "motion to reopen" in his criminal case. He has not sought, nor received leave of the Seventh Circuit to file a second or successive habeas petition, and this Court therefore cannot consider his motion to reopen and it is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
WILLIAM D. STIEHL DISTRICT JUDGE
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.