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 of America v. Ray Legg

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS


April 4, 2012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
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

20120404

© 1992-2012 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.