Jones, Jr v. Warden
ORDER directing the Clerk to send Jones both a blank § 2241 form petition and § 2255 form motion. Within 30 days after the Clerk serves movant with a copy of this Order and the form petitions, he must re-file both his chosen petition and any supporting memorandum of law explaining his entitlement to relief from his conviction. Signed by Magistrate Judge G. R. Smith on 3/9/18. (jrb)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
JAMES BERNARD JONES, Jr.,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Scott L. Poff, Clerk
United States District Court
By James Burrell at 3:13 pm, Mar 09, 2018
James Bernard Jones, Jr., filed a self-styled “Petition for Writ [of]
Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 2241,” though the heart of his petition
seeks reconsideration -- rather than challenges the execution -- of his
sentence. Doc. 111 at 2-3 (challenging his classification as an armed
career criminal at sentencing based on his “prior conviction of Florida
battery on law enforcement officer,” contending the “real estate
attorney” assigned as CJA counsel was ineffective at sentencing, and
arguing the district court erred in applying the sentencing guidelines).1
Compare 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (a vehicle for challenging the execution of a
The Court is citing to the criminal docket in CR409-416 unless otherwise noted,
and all page numbers are those imprinted by the Court’s docketing software.
sentence) with 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (a vehicle for challenging the propriety
of the federal conviction or sentence itself).
The federal courts have long made available to jails and prisons
specific forms for filing habeas and civil rights cases. In Williams v.
Freesemann, 2015 WL 6798946 (S.D. Ga. Oct. 15, 2015), this Court noted
that some inmate-litigants bypass those forms in favor of “home-brewed”
filings. Adverse factors can motivate that effort. The Court’s forms
force inmates to answer questions aimed at capturing things like repeat
(e.g., successive writ) habeas filings. See doc. 70 (Jones’ motion to vacate
his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255), docs. 76, 81 & 82 (denying § 2255
motion), doc. 87 (appeal opinion affirming denial of his § 2255 motion),
doc. 96 (appeal opinion on remand from the Supreme Court for
reconsideration in light of Johnson v. United States, 135 S. C.t. 2551
(2015), reaffirming denial of his § 2255 motion).
typically omit those prophylactic questions from their filings. See, e.g.,
Bright v. Corizon Health Corp., 2015 WL 9257155 at * 1 (S.D. Ga. Dec.
18, 2015) (“Bright’s incentive to omit his prior case information is strong
because of the § 1915(g) three-strike bar.”).
The Clerk is therefore DIRECTED to send Jones both a blank
§ 2241 form petition and § 2255 form motion. Within 30 days after the
Clerk serves movant with a copy of this Order and the form petitions, he
must re-file both his chosen petition and any supporting memorandum of
law explaining his entitlement to relief from his conviction. If Jones fails
to respond within 30 days of service of this Order, the case will be
recommended for dismissal on abandonment grounds.
SO ORDERED, this
day of March, 2018.
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?