Garner v. USA

Filing 18

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER, The Court GRANTS Garner's motion for voluntary dismissal (Doc. 15 ); DISMISSES Garner's amended petition (Doc. 4 ) without prejudice; DENIES Garner's motion for bond (Doc. 5 ); and DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to enter judgment accordingly Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 4/19/2017. (jdh)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
ISAAC C. GARNER,
Petitioner,
v.

Civil No. 16-cv-406-JPG

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Criminal No 08-cr-30210-JPG

Respondent.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on petitioner Isaac C. Garner’s motion to voluntarily
dismiss without prejudice his amended sealed motion to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Doc. 15). Garner concedes that his § 2255 motion has no merit in
light of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Beckles v. United States, 137 S. Ct. 886 (2017).
The Government has responded to the motion asking for a ruling on the merits in light of the fact
that the § 2255 motion has been fully briefed (Doc. 16).
Garner’s motion is filed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2). Rule 41(a)(2)
provides that only the Court may dismiss an action after an adverse party has filed an answer or
motion for summary judgment and in the absence of a stipulation of dismissal of an entire case
signed by all the parties.
All parties being in agreement that Garner’s § 2255 motion has no merit after Beckles, the
Court finds that granting Garner’s motion for voluntary dismissal is the most efficient way to bring
this matter to a close without unnecessarily expending judicial resources. Accordingly, the Court:


GRANTS Garner’s motion for voluntary dismissal (Doc. 15);



DISMISSES Garner’s amended petition (Doc. 4) without prejudice;



DENIES Garner’s motion for bond (Doc. 5); and



DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to enter judgment accordingly.
The Court notes that whether this § 2255 motion “counts” as a first motion for the purposes

of the certification requirement for second or successive petitions under 28 U.S.C. § 2255(h) is a
matter to be determined if and when Garner ever files a subsequent § 2255 motion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: April 19, 2017
s/ J. Phil Gilbert
J. PHIL GILBERT
DISTRICT JUDGE

2