Patrick v. United States

E.D. Missouri

Patrick v. United States

DecidedAugust 16, 2024

Docket4:24-cv-00607

StatusUnknown

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

Bluebook

Patrick v. United States, (E.D. Mo. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION

LONZO PATRICK, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) No. 4:24-cv-607-HEA ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Respondent. )

OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on self-represented Petitioner Lonzo Patrick’s “Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241.” (ECF No. 1). Despite its title, the Petition appears to challenge Petitioner’s federal sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. “A petitioner who seeks to challenge his sentence or conviction generally must do so in the sentencing court through § 2255 and cannot use § 2241 to challenge the conviction without first showing that § 2255 would be inadequate or ineffective.” Abdullah v. Hedrick, 392 F.3d 957, 959 (8th Cir. 2004); see also Jones v. Hendrix, 8 F.4th 683, 686 (8th Cir. 2021) (“Typically, a federal inmate must challenge a conviction or sentence through a § 2255 motion to vacate.”) (internal quotation marks omitted). Petitioner has not shown that § 2255 is inadequate or ineffective to challenge the legality of his sentence. Therefore, the Court will order Petitioner to refile his Petition on the appropriate Court-approved form. See E.D.Mo. L.R. 2.06(A) (“All actions brought by self-represented plaintiffs or petitioners should be filed on a Court-provided form where applicable. If an action is not filed on a Court-provided form, the Court, in its discretion, may order the self-represented plaintiff or petitioner to file the action on a Court-provided form.”). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall mail to Petitioner a copy of the Court’s “Motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence” form (AO 243). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner shall complete the form in its entirety and return it to the Court no later than twenty-one (21) days from the date of this Order. Failure to comply with this Order will result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice. Dated this 16" day of August, 2024.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION

LONZO PATRICK, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) No. 4:24-cv-607-HEA ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Respondent. )

OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on self-represented Petitioner Lonzo Patrick’s “Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241.” (ECF No. 1). Despite its title, the Petition appears to challenge Petitioner’s federal sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. “A petitioner who seeks to challenge his sentence or conviction generally must do so in the sentencing court through § 2255 and cannot use § 2241 to challenge the conviction without first showing that § 2255 would be inadequate or ineffective.” Abdullah v. Hedrick, 392 F.3d 957, 959 (8th Cir. 2004); see also Jones v. Hendrix, 8 F.4th 683, 686 (8th Cir. 2021) (“Typically, a federal inmate must challenge a conviction or sentence through a § 2255 motion to vacate.”) (internal quotation marks omitted). Petitioner has not shown that § 2255 is inadequate or ineffective to challenge the legality of his sentence. Therefore, the Court will order Petitioner to refile his Petition on the appropriate Court-approved form. See E.D.Mo. L.R. 2.06(A) (“All actions brought by self-represented plaintiffs or petitioners should be filed on a Court-provided form where applicable. If an action is not filed on a Court-provided form, the Court, in its discretion, may order the self-represented plaintiff or petitioner to file the action on a Court-provided form.”). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall mail to Petitioner a copy of the Court’s “Motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence” form (AO 243). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner shall complete the form in its entirety and return it to the Court no later than twenty-one (21) days from the date of this Order. Failure to comply with this Order will result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice. Dated this 16" day of August, 2024.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Patrick v. United States, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/patrick-v-united-states-moed-2024.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack