Gillispie v. United States

E.D. Virginia

Gillispie v. United States

DecidedJuly 30, 2021

Docket3:21-cv-00452

StatusUnknown

This text of Gillispie v. United States (Gillispie v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Virginia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gillispie v. United States, (E.D. Va. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division CORRIE GILLISPIE, ) Petitioner, v. Civil Action No. 3:21CV452—HEH UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. MEMORANDUM OPINION (Denying § 2255 Motion) Corrie Gillispie, a federal prisoner currently incarcerated in FCI Petersburg, was convicted and sentenced in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee on September 7, 2018. See United States v. Gillispie, No. 1:16CR77-TRM— CHS-1 (E.D. Tenn. Sept. 28, 2018). On July 14, 2021, the Court received from Gillispie a hand-written document titled, “NOTICE THAT PETITIONER IS UNLAWFULLY HELD UNDER VIRGINIA’S JURISDICTION WITHOUT JUSTIFICATION,” in which he attacks his convictions and sentences for various human-trafficking offenses from the Eastern District of Tennessee. (ECF No. 1.) A motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 provides the primary means of collateral attack on the imposition of a federal conviction and sentence. See Pack v. Yusuff, 218 F.3d 448, 451 (Sth Cir. 2000) (quoting Cox v. Warden, Fed. Det. Ctr., 911 F.2d 1111, 1113 (Sth Cir. 1990)). To the extent that Gillispie wishes to challenge his convictions or his sentences, he must file a § 2255 motion in the court where he was convicted and

sentenced. Accordingly, Gillispie’s present submission, which the Court construes as an

attempt to file a § 2255 motion, will be denied without prejudice. The action will be dismissed. A certificate of appealability will be denied. The Clerk is directed to forward to Gillispie the form for filing a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Any § 2255 motion that Gillispie files must conform to the rules governing such motions and be sworn to under the penalty of perjury. See Rules Governing § 2255 Proceedings for the U.S. District Courts, Rule 2(b). Gillispie is also advised that § 2255 motions are subject to a one-year statute of limitations and a restriction against second or successive petitions. See 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f), (h). If Gillispie desires to file a § 2255 motion at this time, he should complete the form and send it to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee. An appropriate Order shall accompany this Memorandum Opinion. AW /s/ Henry E. Hudson Date: Tl 4 30, 20 211 Senior United States District Judge Richmond, Virginia

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division CORRIE GILLISPIE, ) Petitioner, v. Civil Action No. 3:21CV452—HEH UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. MEMORANDUM OPINION (Denying § 2255 Motion) Corrie Gillispie, a federal prisoner currently incarcerated in FCI Petersburg, was convicted and sentenced in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee on September 7, 2018. See United States v. Gillispie, No. 1:16CR77-TRM— CHS-1 (E.D. Tenn. Sept. 28, 2018). On July 14, 2021, the Court received from Gillispie a hand-written document titled, “NOTICE THAT PETITIONER IS UNLAWFULLY HELD UNDER VIRGINIA’S JURISDICTION WITHOUT JUSTIFICATION,” in which he attacks his convictions and sentences for various human-trafficking offenses from the Eastern District of Tennessee. (ECF No. 1.) A motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 provides the primary means of collateral attack on the imposition of a federal conviction and sentence. See Pack v. Yusuff, 218 F.3d 448, 451 (Sth Cir. 2000) (quoting Cox v. Warden, Fed. Det. Ctr., 911 F.2d 1111, 1113 (Sth Cir. 1990)). To the extent that Gillispie wishes to challenge his convictions or his sentences, he must file a § 2255 motion in the court where he was convicted and

sentenced. Accordingly, Gillispie’s present submission, which the Court construes as an

attempt to file a § 2255 motion, will be denied without prejudice. The action will be dismissed. A certificate of appealability will be denied. The Clerk is directed to forward to Gillispie the form for filing a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Any § 2255 motion that Gillispie files must conform to the rules governing such motions and be sworn to under the penalty of perjury. See Rules Governing § 2255 Proceedings for the U.S. District Courts, Rule 2(b). Gillispie is also advised that § 2255 motions are subject to a one-year statute of limitations and a restriction against second or successive petitions. See 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f), (h). If Gillispie desires to file a § 2255 motion at this time, he should complete the form and send it to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee. An appropriate Order shall accompany this Memorandum Opinion. AW /s/ Henry E. Hudson Date: Tl 4 30, 20 211 Senior United States District Judge Richmond, Virginia

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Gillispie v. United States, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gillispie-v-united-states-vaed-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack