From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Bowman

United States District Court, D. Nevada
Mar 21, 2011
2:03-CR-00015-PMP-PAL (D. Nev. Mar. 21, 2011)

Opinion

2:03-CR-00015-PMP-PAL.

March 21, 2011


ORDER


On this date, December 22, 2010, the Court entered an Order (Doc. #55) directing that Plaintiff United States file a response to Defendant Bowman's letter/motion seeking credit against a criminal sentence imposed for time he had served in pre-trial detention.

Plaintiff United States failed to comply with this Court's Order (Doc. #55) and on February 28, 2011, Defendant Bowman filed a Request/Motion for Default Judgment on the issue (Doc. # 56 #57). On March 1, 2011, Plaintiff United States filed a Response (Doc. #58) explaining that the Government's failure to comply with this Court's Order (Doc. #55) was "due to an internal miscommunication to the extent a conflicting information as to which attorney was assigned to the case." Defendant Bowman filed a Reply Memorandum (Doc. #59) on March 18, 2011.

The Court does not find the Government's failure to timely respond to be a justification for granting by default relief to which this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider. As noted in the Government's Response (Doc. #58). As the Government correctly observes in its response, to the extent he is entitled to do so, Defendant must seek the relief he requests by appropriate motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in the district where he is currently incarcerated.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant Bowman's Motion for Entry of Default (Doc. #56 #57) is DENIED.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Bowman

United States District Court, D. Nevada
Mar 21, 2011
2:03-CR-00015-PMP-PAL (D. Nev. Mar. 21, 2011)
Case details for

U.S. v. Bowman

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. KIRK ANTHONY BOWMAN, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, D. Nevada

Date published: Mar 21, 2011

Citations

2:03-CR-00015-PMP-PAL (D. Nev. Mar. 21, 2011)