Bruce v. United States Of America
Filing
2
ORDER closing the 1 Motion to Vacate/Set Aside/Correct Sentence (2255) filed by Larron R. Bruce. The Clerk is directed to forward Bruce's 1 Motion with criminal docket entries 170, 152, 165, 167, and 168 in CR415-204 to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals for consideration. Signed by Magistrate Judge G. R. Smith on 10/25/17. (wwp)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
SAVANNAH DIVISION
LARRON R. BRUCE,
Movant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CV417-201
CR415-204
ORDER
Indicted on multiple counts of drug-trafficking charges, Larron
Bruce pled guilty to one count of conspiracy to possess and to
manufacture in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. Docs. 1 (indictment), 49
(plea agreement). 1 His sentence was affirmed on appeal. United States
v. Bruce, 665 F. App’x 852, 853 (11th Cir. 2016). His first motion to
vacate his sentence, under theories of ineffective assistance of counsel,
court errors, and lack of evidence to convict, was denied on the merits
two months ago. Docs. 152. (motion); 165, 167 & 168 (recommendation,
order adopting the recommendation, and judgment entered against
1
The Court is citing to the criminal docket in CR415-204 unless otherwise noted,
and all page numbers are those imprinted by the Court’s docketing software.
Bruce on the merits). He has now filed with the Court an Eleventh
Circuit form “Application for leave to file a second or successive motion
to vacate, set aside or correct sentence” under § 2255. Doc. 170. The
Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to forward Bruce’s motion to the Eleventh
Circuit Court of Appeals for consideration, along with a copy of this
Court’s docket and docket entries 152, 165, 167 and 168. The Clerk is
further DIRECTED to close CV417-201 as an erroneously opened
§ 2255 action.
SO ORDERED, this 25th day of October, 2017.
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?