Limon-Pacias v. Werlich
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Clifford J. Proud. Signed by Judge David R. Herndon on 11/30/2017. (tjk)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pro se Petitioner Ceasar Limon-Pacias, currently incarcerated in the
Federal Correctional Institution at Greenville, Illinois, brings this habeas corpus
action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Relying on the case of Mathis v. United
States, ––– U.S. ––––, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016) and related case law, he challenges
his enhanced sentence based on a prior drug conviction in Texas for delivery of a
controlled substance. (Doc. 1, pp. 1-4). This case is now before the Court for a
preliminary review of the Petition pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing
Section 2254 Cases in United States District Courts.
Without commenting on the merits of Petitioner's claims, the Court
concludes that the Petition survives preliminary review under Rule 4 and Rule
1(b). Given the limited record and the still-developing application of Mathis, it is
not plainly apparent that Petitioner is not entitled to habeas relief.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Respondent Werlich shall answer or
otherwise plead within thirty days of the date this order is entered (January 2,
This preliminary order to respond does not, of course, preclude the
Government from raising any objection or defense it may wish to present. Service
upon the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Illinois, 750 Missouri
Avenue, East St. Louis, Illinois, shall constitute sufficient service.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to Local Rule 72.1(a)(2), this
cause is referred to United States Magistrate Judge Clifford J. Proud for further
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this entire matter be REFERRED to
United States Magistrate Judge Proud for disposition, as contemplated by Local
Rule 72.2(b)(2) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), should all the parties consent to such a
Petitioner is ADVISED of his continuing obligation to keep the Clerk (and
each opposing party) informed of any change in his whereabouts during the
pendency of this action. This notification shall be done in writing and not later
than seven (7) days after a transfer or other change in address occurs. Failure to
The response date ordered herein is controlling. Any date that CM/ECF should generate in the
course of this litigation is a guideline only. See SDIL-EFR 3.
provide such notice may result in dismissal of this action. See Fed. R. Civ. P.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 30th day of November, 2017.
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?