Alexander v. USA

Filing 12

ORDER denying as moot Petitioner's 11 Motion for leave to file Traverse to Government's Answer to 2255 Motion. Signed by District Judge Robert J. Conrad, Jr on 10/23/2019. (brl)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
3:16-cv-294-RJC
(3:14-cr-99-RJC-DCK-4)
ANTHONY LAMAR ALEXANDER,
Petitioner,
vs.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent.
_______________________________

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court on pro se Petitioner’s Motion for Leave to File
Traverse to Government’s Answer to § 2255 Motion, (Doc. No. 11).
On October 13, 2016, the Court granted Petitioner 14 days to respond to the
Government’s Motion to Dismiss, (Doc. No. 7). No response was filed so, on November 15, 2016,
the Court entered an Order denying and dismissing with prejudice Petitioner’s Motion to Vacate,
Set Aside, or Correct Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, (Doc. No. 8). The Clerk of Court
entered a Judgment, (Doc. No. 9), and this case was closed. Petitioner’s present Motion is dated
November 14, 2016, which is well beyond the deadline for filing a Response, and it was docketed
after the Court denied the § 2255 Motion to Vacate. In addition, Petitioner is no longer in custody.
See Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7–8 (1998) (an incarcerated convict’s or parolee’s challenge
to the validity of his conviction always satisfies the case or controversy requirement, but, once a
convict’s sentence has expired, some collateral consequence of the conviction must exist if the suit
is to be maintained). For all these reasons, the Motion will be denied as moot.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for Leave to File Traverse to
1

Government’s Answer to § 2255 Motion, (Doc. No. 11), is DENIED as moot.

Signed: October 23, 2019

2