James v. United States of America
| Craig Anthony James |
| United States of America |
| 1:2013cv01396 |
| August 30, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Central District of Illinois |
| Peoria Office |
| XX US, Outside State |
| Joe Billy McDade |
| Motions to Vacate Sentence |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2255 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
23
ORDER & OPINION entered by Judge Joe Billy McDade on 05/28/2014. For the foregoing reasons, Petitioner's Motion for Leave to Appeal In Forma Pauperis 22 is DENIED. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 24(a)(4) the clerk is ordered to immediately notify the parties and the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals that this Court has denied Petitioner's motion and has found the appeal is not taken in good faith because it is without merit. IT IS SO ORDERED. (cc:plf)(JS, ilcd)
|
|
Filing
5
ORDER & OPINION Entered by Judge Joe Billy McDade on 10/29/13: IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED: 1. Respondent's Motion for Order Directing Attorney Karl Bryning to Submit an Affidavit in Response to Petitioner's Claim of Ineffective Assistance of Counsel 4 is GRANTED. 2. Within 21 days of the date of this Order, Karl Bryning, Assistant Federal Public Defender, SHALL submit to the United States Attorney's Office, Central District of Illinois, an affidavit addressing the following questions: a. Did Mr. Bryning independently assess whether there was sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant (i) possessed the firearm that is the subject of Count V (ii) in furtherance of a drug trafficking crim e? b. If so, what was counsel's conclusion and on what information was this conclusion based?c. What advice, if any, did counsel provide to petitioner concerning pleading guilty to Count V of the indictment?d. Did counsel tell or otherwise dire ct petitioner to plead guilty to Count V of the indictment? 3. Respondent shall include a copy of Mr. Bryning's affidavit with its Response to Petitioner's § 2255 Motion when such Response is filed with the Court, and shall serve a copy of both the Response and the affidavit upon Petitioner at that time. (cc: petitioner)(TK, ilcd)
|
|
Filing
3
ORDER & OPINION entered by Judge Joe Billy McDade on 9/10/13. IT IS ORDERED: That the Clerk SHALL serve a copy of the Motion 1 upon Respondent pursuant to Rule 3(b) of the Rules Governing Secion 2255 Proceedings for the United States District Courts. SEE FULL ORDER. cc: Petitioner by Clerk. (FDT, ilcd)
|
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 Illinois Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: James v. United States of America | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent: United States of America | |
| Represented By: | Greggory R Walters |
| 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: Craig Anthony James | |
| 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.
