Opinion
3:22-cv-221-FDW 3:20-cr-185-FDW-DCK-1
07-07-2022
ANTOINE SPEARMAN, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.
ORDER
Frank D. Whitney United States District Judge.
THIS MATTER is before the Court sua sponte.
Petitioner filed a pro se “Motion for Reduction in Sentence” that was docketed as a Motion to Vacate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, and was opened in this civil case. [Doc. 1]. The Court was unable to determine whether the Petitioner was attempting to file a Motion to Vacate pursuant to § 2255, or to seek a sentence reduction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582. On May 20, 2022, the Court provided the Petitioner with warnings pursuant to United States v. Castro, 540 U.S. 375 (2003) and required him to inform the Court, within 30 days, whether he agrees to recharacterize his Motion pursuant to § 2255, or whether he is attempting to proceed pursuant to § 3582. [Doc. 2]. The Court also informed Petitioner that the present Motion is insufficient to proceed under either § 2255 or § 3582 because it is unsigned, and required him to file a superseding Amended Motion within 30 days. [Id.].
The Petitioner has filed a “Motion for Sentence Reduction Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582” [Doc. 3] in response to the Order.
Because the Petitioner has not agreed to have his Motion recharacterized pursuant to Castro, the instant action will be dismissed without prejudice and closed. The Clerk will be instructed to docket the “Motion for Sentence Reduction Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582” [Doc. 3] in the criminal case for further proceedings.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that:
1. This action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
2. The Clerk is instructed to terminate this case, and docket the “Motion for Sentence Reduction Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582” [Doc. 3] in Criminal Case No. 3:20-cr-185-FDW-DCK-1.