James v. USA

Filing 2

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER, The Court GRANTS petitioner 14 days to submit a supplement to his § 2255. The supplement is required to be filed on or before June 9, 2017. The Court ORDERS the Government to file a response to Mr. James' petition (Doc. 1) and any supplement by July 10, 2017. Petitioner may file a reply brief by July31, 2017. Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 5/24/2017. (jdh)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
DEKAL T. JAMES,
Petitioner,
Case No. 17-cv-00537-JPG

v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on petitioner Dekal T. James' Motion (Doc. 1) to
Vacate, Set Aside or Correct her sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. For the following
reasons, Mr. James' motion survives this threshold review and the Court orders the government to
file its response.
On August 16, 2007, Mr. James plead guilty to one count of conspiracy to distribute “crack
cocaine;” two counts of distribution of “crack cocaine;” and one count of using a residence for the
purpose of distributing “crack cocaine.” See USA v. Dekal T. James, 07-cr-40006, SDIL, Doc.
100.

He was sentenced on January 11, 2008, to imprisonment for 262 months and 10 years of

supervised release. See USA v. Dekal T. James, 07-cr-40006, SDIL, Doc. 186. He completed his
term of imprisonment and commenced his supervised release on December 4, 2015.
On April 20, 2016, the government petitioned to revoke Mr. James’ supervised released for
his failure to register as a sex offender, failing to maintain employment, failure to notify his
probation officer of his change in address, and failure to notify his probation officer of being
arrested or questioned by a law enforcement officer. See USA v. Dekal T. James, 07-cr-40006,
SDIL, Doc. 518. At the final revocation hearing, the Court revoked Mr. James’ supervised
Page 1 of 3

released and sentenced him to 36 months of imprisonment with no supervised released. See USA
v. Dekal T. James, 07-cr-40006, SDIL, Doc. 531.
Petitioner filed his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Petition on May 22, 2017, alleging ineffective
assistance of counsel at the revocation hearing. The Court has reviewed the petition and has
identified the following claim:
1.

Whether Petitioner was denied due process by ineffective assistance of counsel for
failing to appeal the revocation decision.

2.

Whether Petitioner was denied due process by ineffective assistance of counsel for
failing to advise Mr. James of a plea offer.

Mr. James also alleges that he was denied due process by ineffective assistance of counsel
for his counsel failure to file appropriate motions; failing to submit evidence; and failing to review
evidence with the petitioner. However, these allegations are extremely vague. Mr. James does
not specifically state what motions he believed should have been filed, or what specific evidence
he claims was not submitted, or how that evidence would have affected the outcome of the
revocation hearing.
Therefore, the Court GRANTS petitioner 14 days to submit a supplement to his § 2255.
The supplement is LIMITED to Ground Three and should clarify and provide supporting facts to
his general claim. The supplement is required to be filed on or before June 9, 2017.
The Court next ORDERS the Government to file a response to Mr. James’ petition (Doc.
1) and any supplement by July 10, 2017. The Government shall, as part of its response, attach all
relevant portions of the record. Petitioner may file a reply brief (no longer than 5 pages) by July
31, 2017.

Page 2 of 3

If review of the briefs indicates that an evidentiary hearing is warranted, the court will set
the hearing by separate notice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: 5/24/2017
s/J. Phil Gilbert
J. PHIL GILBERT
DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 3 of 3