Source: http://il.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20070524_0000340.CIL.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2016-12-03 17:51:50
Document Index: 699623053

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 2255', '§ 2255', '§ 2255', '§ 2255', '§ 2255', '§ 2255', '§ 2255']

JEFFREY R. CERVANTEZ, PETITIONER,v.UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RESPONDENT.
On May 21, 2007, Petitioner, Jeffrey R. Cervantez ("Cervantez"), filed a rambling and virtually incoherent pleading entitled "Complaint" that refers generically to causes in admiralty, property rights, tradenames, and ineffective assistance of counsel. Accordingly, the Court intends to construe this document as a Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
In Castro v. United States, 540 U.S. 375, 383 (2003), the Supreme Court held that when a court recharacterizes a pro se petitioner's pleading as his first motion pursuant to § 2255, the court must "notify the pro se litigant that it intends to recharacterize the pleading, warn the litigant that this recharacterization means that any subsequent § 2255 motion will be subject to the restrictions on second or successive motions, and provide the litigant an opportunity to withdraw the motion or to amend it so that it contains all the § 2255 claims he believes he has."
Accordingly, Cervantez is hereby placed on notice of the Court's intent to recharacterize his filing as his initial § 2255 motion. If this is not his intent, he may voluntarily withdraw the pleading by filing a motion to withdraw with the Court on or before June 5, 2007. Otherwise, he will have until that same deadline to file an amended motion including all the § 2255 claims that he believes he has. Failure to do either of these things will result in the Court proceeding to rule on the pleading in its present form as a § 2255 motion.