U.S. v. Tate, 7:07-CR-19-BO. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. North Carolina
Number: infdco20180820737
Visitors: 16
Filed: Aug. 14, 2018
Latest Update: Aug. 14, 2018
Summary: ORDER TERRENCE W. BOYLE , District Judge . This cause comes before the Court on a letter filed by Lacy Jervay Tate regarding the Court's disnmissal of his previously-filed letters in which he sought a reduction in his sentence. In the instant letter, Tate states that he did not receive the Court's order which directed him to either return the robs for proceeding with a motion under 28 U.S.C. 2255 or notify the Court of his intent to withdraw his motions in letter form requesting a reducti
Summary: ORDER TERRENCE W. BOYLE , District Judge . This cause comes before the Court on a letter filed by Lacy Jervay Tate regarding the Court's disnmissal of his previously-filed letters in which he sought a reduction in his sentence. In the instant letter, Tate states that he did not receive the Court's order which directed him to either return the robs for proceeding with a motion under 28 U.S.C. 2255 or notify the Court of his intent to withdraw his motions in letter form requesting a reductio..
More
ORDER
TERRENCE W. BOYLE, District Judge.
This cause comes before the Court on a letter filed by Lacy Jervay Tate regarding the Court's disnmissal of his previously-filed letters in which he sought a reduction in his sentence. In the instant letter, Tate states that he did not receive the Court's order which directed him to either return the robs for proceeding with a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 or notify the Court of his intent to withdraw his motions in letter form requesting a reduction in sentence. [DE 59]. Tate states that he wants to continue, and would like to respond to the Court's order.
The clerk is DIRECTED to provide to Tate a copy of the Court's order entered April 23, 2018, along with the forms necessary for filing a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Court declines to reconsider its prior dismissal of Tate's motions in letter form requesting a reduction in sentence, and again warns Tate of effects of filing a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and advises him as to the requirements of § 2255. Castro v. United States, 540 U.S. 375, 377, 383 (2003). The clerk is DIRECTED to serve Tate at his most recently available address, RRM Raleigh, Old NC 75 Highway, Butner, NC 27509. See https://www.bop.gov/inmateloc/ (last visited August 7, 2018).
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
