Willis v. USA
Petitioner: Steven Willis
Respondent: USA
Case Number: 4:2015cv01275
Filed: August 18, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
Office: St. Louis Office
County: St. Louis - City
Presiding Judge: E. Richard Webber
Nature of Suit: Motions to Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2255
Jury Demanded By: None
RSS 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
September 11, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 31 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (See Full Order) IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner Steven Willis's Motion for Appointment of New Counsel [ECF No. 30 ] is DENIED. Signed by District Judge E. Richard Webber on 9/11/17. (EAB) (Copy of Order sent to petitioner on 9/11/17). (EAB).
November 2, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 20 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. (See Full Order.) IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall notify the United States Probation Office of Movant's Amended Motion to Vacate (Docket No. 19 ), and that it is brought pursuant to the Supreme Court case of Johnson v. United States. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, within a reasonable time, and in its usual course of business, the United States Probation Office shall prepare and file, in movant's criminal case, a new Resentence Report relative to movant's contentions under Johnson, which shall be filed under seal, with access to the Court and the parties who have entered their appearance in this matter. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within fourteen (14) days of the filing of the Probati on Office's Disclosure Copy of the Resentence Report, the parties shall file, in movant's criminal case, simultaneous objections to the Resentence Report or statements that they have no objection. Within seven (7) days of such time, the Uni ted States Probation Office shall file a final copy of the Resentence Report in movant's criminal case. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within fourteen (14) days of the filing of the Final Resentence Report by the Probation Office in the criminal ca se, the Government shall file its response to Movant's Amended Motion to Vacate in this case. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any reply to the Governments response to Movant's Amended Motion to Vacate shall be filed, in this case, no later than fourteen (14) days from the date the response is filed. Signed by District Judge E. Richard Webber on 11/2/2016. (Memorandum & Order and Amended Motion to Vacate forwarded to U.S. Probation Office via interoffice mail this date.) (CBL)
October 16, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 6 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. (See Full Order.) IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to forward a copy of movants amended § 2255 motion to the Office of the Public Defender for the Eastern District of Missouri. IT IS FURTHER ORDER ED that the Public Defender shall notify this Court, within forty-five (45) days of the date of this Memorandum and Order, whether it will be pursuing movant's arguments under Johnson, either by filing a written notice in this action of their in tent not to represent movant, or by filing a second amended motion to vacate, brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, also in this action, or, if applicable, a request in the Court of Appeals for leave to bring a successive § 2255 motion, as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court shall hold this matter in abeyance for forty-five (45) days. Signed by District Judge E. Richard Webber on 10/16/2015. (Order and Amended 2255 Petition sent to FPD this date.) (CBL)
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

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?