Jenkins v. USA
ORDER denying 6 Motion for Release on Bond. Signed by Judge David R. Herndon on 4/11/2018. (ceh)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
ANTWON D. JENKINS
a/k/a Antoine Jenkins
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
HERNDON, District Judge:
Before the Court is pro se petitioner Antwon Jenkins’ (“petitioner”) Motion
for Release on Bond pending resolution of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 petition (doc. 6).
Petitioner seeks he be released on “personal recognizance, unsecured appearance
bond, or any combination that [the Court] deems appropriate” while deciding his
section 2255 petition, and also wishes to supplement his section 2255 petition
with the same argument as his fifth ground for relief.
Id. at 1.
DENIES both requests.
After review of the conditions set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3143(b) [Release or
Detention of a Defendant Pending Sentence or Appeal] and 18 U.S.C. § 3142, the
Court finds petitioner has failed to satisfy the requirements necessary to
overcome his detention.
Additionally, the cases petitioner cites in support of
releasing a defendant pending resolution of his or her case are not applicable
here. See doc. 6. at 5-6. Regardless of petitioner’s beliefs, if the appellate court’s
decision in dismissing Count 2 from petitioner’s unrelated criminal case, 3:12-cr1
30239-DRH-1, is affirmed, petitioner will not be released from prison. Whatever
the outcome of the government’s appeal to the Supreme Court of the United
States, petitioner will still be serving a term of imprisonment for his kidnapping
conviction (Count 1), in which he was sentenced to 188 months to run
consecutively to the count under review, Using or Carrying a Firearm to Commit a
Federal Crime of Violence. See id. at doc 258.1 Even further, after petitioner’s
term of imprisonment for kidnapping expires, petitioner is to serve an additional
27 months imprisonment to run consecutively to the term sentenced in 3:12-cr30239-DRH-1, for his drug-related conviction in case 3:13-cr-30125-DRH-11.
See id. doc. 539.
Clearly, the dismissal of one count from petitioner’s 2012
criminal case does not warrant petitioner’s release on bond.
Finally, the Court DENIES petitioner’s request to supplement his section
2255 motion with the bond argument as ground for relief #5, as the nature of the
argument is unrelated to his 2013 criminal case, which is the underlying case for
petitioner’s section 2255 motion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
United States District Judge
If the dismissal of Count 2 is affirmed, petitioner will be re-sentenced for Count 1, Kidnapping.
See 3:12-cr-30239-DRH-1, doc. 337.
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?