Green v. United States of America

Filing 7

ORDER signed by Judge Pamela Pepper on 1/24/2017 GRANTING 5 the petitioner's motion for leave to supplement original 2255 motion. (cc: all counsel; by US Mail to petitioner) (pwm)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
______________________________________________________________________________
LARRY W. GREEN,

Case No. 16-cv-502-pp

Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent.
______________________________________________________________________________
ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO SUPPLEMENT
ORIGINAL 2255 MOTION (DKT. NO. 5)
______________________________________________________________________________
The petitioner filed his §2255 motion on April 25, 2016. Dkt. No. 1. The
court ordered the government to file its response by the end of the day on
January 31, 2017. Dkt. No. 4.
The plaintiff now has filed a motion to supplement his original petition.
Dkt. No. 5. While the motion is three pages long, the request the petitioner
makes is simple. Since he filed his petition in April, the Supreme Court has
decided Mathis v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (June 23, 2016).
In addition, the Seventh Circuit has issued two decisions: United States v.
Haney, 840 F.3d 472 (7th Cir., Oct. 27, 2016) and Holt v. United States, 843
F.3d 720 (7th Cir., Dec. 13, 2016). Id. at 1. The petitioner asks that the court
take these decisions into account in ruling on his §2255 motion. Id.
This request is reasonable. The petitioner could not have included these
decisions in his original petition. The court will grant the petitioner’s motion to

1

supplement his petition with these cases, and with the arguments he makes
based on these cases.
The respondent’s brief currently is due January 31, 2017. Dkt. No. 4. It
is possible that the government already is aware of these decisions, and plans
to discuss them in its brief. If not, however, and if the respondent needs more
time to analyze these cases and incorporate them into its brief, the respondent
may file a request for an extension of time, and the court will grant it.
The court GRANTS the petitioner’s motion for leave to supplement
original 2255 motion. Dkt. No. 5.
Dated in Milwaukee, Wisconsin this 24th day of January, 2017.

2