Jones v. USA
Petitioner: Ortez Jones
Respondent: USA
Case Number: 4:2016cv01755
Filed: November 10, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
Office: St. Louis Office
County: St. Louis - City
Presiding Judge: Charles A. Shaw
Nature of Suit: Motions to Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2255
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
February 13, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 11 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER -...IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that movant Ortez Jones' Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence is GRANTED. [Doc. 1] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the judgment and commitment in United States v. Ortez Jone s, No. 4:08-CR-26 CAS, filed August 5, 2008 (Crim. Doc. 32) is VACATED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the United States Probation Office shall promptly prepare an updated presentence investigation report on Mr. Jones. Movant is granted a n ew sentencing hearing, to be set as soon as the presentence investigation report is completed. Until the sentencing hearing, Mr. Jones detention order (Crim. Doc. 14) remains in full force and effect. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall provide a copy of this Memorandum and Order to the United States Probation Office. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to docket a copy of this Memorandum and Order in the criminal case, No. 4:08-CR-26 CAS An appropriate judgment will accompany this Memorandum and Order. Signed by District Judge Charles A. Shaw on 2/13/2017. (MRC)
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?