ORDER DIRECTING THE UNITED STATES TO SUPPLEMENT ITS ANSWER

STEPHAN M. VIDMAR, Magistrate Judge.

THIS MATTER is before the Court on review of the United States' Response to Defendant/Petitioner's Amended [sic] Motion to Correct Sentence Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 [CR Doc. 31], filed on June 6, 2018. The Court will order the United States to supplement its answer no later than July 9, 2018. Defendant may reply to both the original answer [Doc. 31] and supplemental answer in one, single reply, which will be due within 14 days of service of the amended answer.

In his § 2255 motion, Defendant alleges that his counsel provided ineffective assistance. Among other things, Defendant asserts that his "attorney Leon Encinias stated he would file an appeal to help [Defendant] get his time reduced and yet attorney has failed to provide assistance to [Defendant] in any form." [Doc. 24] at 3. The United States argues that Mr. Encinias could not have been constitutionally ineffective for failing to file an appeal because an appeal would have been futile. [Doc. 31] at 10-11. The United States' answer, however, fails to address the governing standard, which is described in United States v. Garrett, 402 F.3d 1262, 1265-67 (10th Cir. 2005). Therefore, the Court will order the United States to supplement its answer to address the standards in Garrett.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the United States supplement its answer to Defendant's § 2255 motion no later than July 9, 2018.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant may reply to both the original answer [Doc. 31] and supplemental answer in one, single reply, which is due within 14 days of service of the amended answer.

IT IS SO ORDERED.