Adams v. USA
Filing
2
ORDER DIRECTING the government to file a response to petitioners motion within THIRTY (30) DAYS of the date of this Order. The government shall, as part of its response, attach all relevant portions of the record. Response due by April 1, 2013. Signed by Chief Judge David R. Herndon on 3/1/2013. (mtm)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
QUAWNTAY ADAMS,
Petitioner,
v.
Criminal Case No. 04-cr-30029-DRH
Civil Case No. 13-cv-170-DRH
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent.
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
HERNDON, Chief Judge:
This matter is before the Court on petitioner Quawntay Adams’s motion to
vacate, set aside, or correct sentence, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Doc. 1).
Petitioner was convicted on charges that he possessed more than 100 kilograms
of marijuana with the intent to distribute, see 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and
(b)(1)(B)(vii), conspired to commit money laundering, see 18 U.S.C. §
1956(a)(1)(A)(i) and (h), and attempted to escape from custody, see 18 U.S.C. §
751(a). On direct appeal, the Seventh Circuit held the evidence did not support
the conviction for conspiracy to commit money laundering but otherwise affirmed
the judgment of conviction. Instantly, petitioner raises various claims in relation
to his conviction, including claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, which
petitioner alleges warrant the relief he seeks.
Page 1 of 2
Pursuant to Rule 4 of the RULES GOVERNING SECTION 2255 PROCEEDINGS, the
Court ORDERS the government to file a response to petitioner’s motion within
THIRTY (30) DAYS of the date of this Order. The government shall, as part of its
response, attach all relevant portions of the record.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 1st day of March, 2013.
Digitally signed by
David R. Herndon
Date: 2013.03.01
16:30:37 -06'00'
Chief Judge
United States District Judge
Page 2 of 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?