From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Dawkins

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Jan 3, 2011
Criminal No. 09-cr-163, See Civil Action No. 10-1521 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 3, 2011)

Opinion

Criminal No. 09-cr-163, See Civil Action No. 10-1521.

January 3, 2011


ORDER


AND NOW, this 3rd day of January, 2011, upon consideration of Defendant/Petitioner's Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence (document No. 50) filed in the above captioned matter on November 15, 2010.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that said Motion is DENIED without prejudice. Defendant's direct appeal is currently pending before the Third Circuit. See Doc. No. 46 (Notice of Appeal). While there may be no jurisdictional bar to consideration of a section 2255 motion to vacate during the pendency of a direct appeal, ordinarily such a motion is deemed to be premature and dismissed without prejudice. "In the context of a collateral attack upon a federal conviction, courts have concluded that there is no jurisdictional bar to a district court's adjudication of a § 2255 motion while the movant's direct appeal is pending, but that such actions are disfavored as a matter of judicial economy and concern that the results on direct appeal may make the district court's efforts a nullity." United States v. Banks, 269 Fed.Appx. 152, 153 (3d Cir. 2008) (citing United States v. Prows, 448 F.3d 1223, 1228-29 (10th Cir. 2006)). Accordingly, Defendant's Motion to vacate is denied without prejudice.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Dawkins

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Jan 3, 2011
Criminal No. 09-cr-163, See Civil Action No. 10-1521 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 3, 2011)
Case details for

U.S. v. Dawkins

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. TRAVON DAWKINS, Defendant/petitioner

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Jan 3, 2011

Citations

Criminal No. 09-cr-163, See Civil Action No. 10-1521 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 3, 2011)