Martin v. USA

Martin v. USA

Petitioner:	Demetrius Martin
Respondent:	USA
Case Number:	4:2015cv00630
Filed:	April 13, 2015
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
Office:	St. Louis Office
County:	St. Louis - City
Presiding Judge:	Stephen N. Limbaugh
Nature of Suit:	Motions to Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2255
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
May 12, 2015	Filing 4 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER..IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that movants motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) is DENIED, and this action is DISMISSED. Signed by District Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr on 5/12/15. (MRS)
April 20, 2015	Filing 2 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER..IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that movant is granted thirty (30) days from the date of this Memorandum and Order either to withdraw the instant motion to reduce sentence or to consent to the Court's reclassification of the motion as one brought pursuant 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Movant must advise the Court of his choice, in writing. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if movant decides to pursue this action under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, he must file an amended motion to vacate on the court -provided form within thirty (30) days of the date of this Memorandum Order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk will mail to movant a copy of the Court's Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence form. Response to Court due by 5/20/2015. Signed by District Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr on 4/20/15. (MRS)

Date Filed

Document Text

May 12, 2015

Filing 4 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER..IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that movants motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) is DENIED, and this action is DISMISSED. Signed by District Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr on 5/12/15. (MRS)

April 20, 2015

Filing 2 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER..IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that movant is granted thirty (30) days from the date of this Memorandum and Order either to withdraw the instant motion to reduce sentence or to consent to the Court's reclassification of the motion as one brought pursuant 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Movant must advise the Court of his choice, in writing. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if movant decides to pursue this action under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, he must file an amended motion to vacate on the court -provided form within thirty (30) days of the date of this Memorandum Order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk will mail to movant a copy of the Court's Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence form. Response to Court due by 5/20/2015. Signed by District Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr on 4/20/15. (MRS)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Missouri Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Martin v. USA
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Respondent: USA
Represented By:	Anthony L. Franks(Designation Assistant US Attorney)
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Demetrius Martin
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

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?