Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Miles

United States District Court, D. Maryland

October 5, 2016

United States
v.
Anthony Miles Civil Action No. ELH-16-2479

          MEMORANDUM TO ANTHONY MILES (BY U.S. MAIL) AND ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY DEBRA DWYER (BY CM/ECF)

          Ellen Lipton Hollander, United States District Judge

         Dear Mr. Miles and Ms. Dwyer:

         As you know, Mr. Miles has filed various post-conviction motions since late 2015, in connection with the Judgment entered on March 20, 2015 (ECF 489). See, e.g., ECF 541; ECF 548; ECF 559. On July 5, 2016, Mr. Miles filed a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his conviction under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (ECF 568, the "Petition"). He claims he is entitled to relief pursuant to Johnson v. United States, U.S., 135 S.Ct. 2551 (2015). Id. Mr. Miles asserts: "The District Court's determination that Movant is a career offender relies on def[i]nitions and information so vague that [the] Constitution's prohibition of vague criminals laws [sic] is violated." Id. at 2.

         In an Order of July 6, 2016 (ECF 569), I directed the government to respond to the Petition within 60 days. Id. The government filed its response well before that deadline, on July 19, 2016. ECF 570.

         Thereafter, on July 28, 2016, the Clerk docketed correspondence from Mr. Miles, in which he requested that his case be held in abeyance until November 18, 2016, because, among other things, he intended to supplement the Petition on grounds other than Johnson. ECF 571. By Order of July 29, 2016 (ECF 572), I granted Mr. Miles's request for an extension. Id. I also stated that, by August 12, 2016, the government could move to rescind the Order as improvidently granted. Id.

         In a submission docketed on August 4, 2016, the government asked the Court to rescind the extension. See ECF 573. The government argued, inter alia: "Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f)(3), a 1-year statute of limitations runs from 'the date on which the right asserted was initially recognized by the Supreme Court.' The Supreme Court issued its opinion in Johnson on June 26, 2015; therefore, the deadline for § 2255 motions filed pursuant to Johnson was June 26, 2016." Id. at 2. Accordingly, the government claimed that Mr. Miles "had an entire year from June 26, 2015 to research, write, and file a Motion to Vacate pursuant to Johnson." Id. at 4 (emphasis in original).

         Nevertheless, the government conceded that "Petitioner's one-year limitation period to file a §2255 claim began on November 18, 2015 and runs until November 18, 2016." Id. at 3-4. But, it argues, id. at 4:

[T]his calculation does not change the fact that the deadline for any Johnson-related § 2255 motion was June 26, 2016 - one year from 'the date on which the right asserted was initially recognized by the Supreme Court.' 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f)(3). Therefore, when Petitioner filed a Motion to Vacate pursuant to § 2255 on July 5, 2016, the one-year clock from November 18, 2015 became moot and any subsequent amendments are rightfully considered supplemental to his Motion to Vacate.

         On August 25, 2016, the Clerk docketed correspondence from Mr. Miles, in which he stated that he is preparing a response to the government's opposition to the stay. ECF 574. On August 29, 2016, Mr. Miles filed a motion seeking an award of expenses and sanctions against Debra L. Dwyer, Assistant United States Attorney, and the government, alleging a violation of Fed.R.Civ.P. 11(b). ECF 575.

         In light of the government's opposition to the lengthy extension to supplement the § 2255 Motion (ECF 573), I entered an Order on September 1, 2016 (ECF 577), shortening the extension by a few weeks. I directed Mr. Miles to submit his supplement by October 24, 2016, rather than November 18, 2016. Id. I also denied Mr. Miles's motion (ECF 575) for an award of expenses and sanctions against Ms. Dwyer and the government, Id.

         On September 26, 2016, the clerk docketed a Reply from Mr. Miles, addressing the government's opposition to the original extension. ECF 578. Mr. Miles asserted, inter alia, that his grounds for a stay "were, and are, obstructed court-access, specifically (1) the severely limited access to FCI Hazelton's legal research and document preparation facilities (i.e. inadequate time); (2) the facilities content inadequacy (i.e. no treatise on contract law or Md. State law); and (3) the government's (i.e. counsel's) exploitation of the above court access obstructions, including [his] time lost responding to frivolous filings." Id. ¶ 34.

         By Order of October 3, 2016, (ECF 579), I declined to extend the deadline from October 24, 2016 to November 18, 2016. Id. I concluded that Mr. Miles has been on notice of the government's response to his Petition (ECF 570) since July 2016. See ECF 579. I also determined that Mr. Miles had not persuaded me of the need for the prolonged extension. Id.

         On October 5, 2016, the clerk docketed Mr. Miles's "Objections" (ECF 581) to the Court's Order of September 1, 2016 (ECF 577). Among other things, Mr. Miles said, id. ¶ 3;

3.) I object to the Court's ruling that all claims are 'now due by October 24, 2016, instead of November 18, 2016.' (577 at 2) on the grounds that the ruling constitutes an ABUSE of DISCRETION and DENIES me the Congressional mandated one year (as calcu[la]ted by the Supreme Court) in which to ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.