Opinion
3:05cr112/RV 3:07cv533/RV/MD.
July 29, 2008
ORDER
This matter is before the court upon defendant's motion to correct court administrative error and to extend time to file report objections (doc. 63) and her reply to the government's response to her § 2255 motion, (doc. 64), both filed after the court's entry of a report and recommendation that her § 2255 motion be dismissed. (Doc. 62). In its recommendation, the court noted that defendant had failed to file a reply brief, despite having been afforded an extension of time in which to do so. Defendant now claims that she submitted her reply brief to the court on April 24, 2008, although court records do not reflect receipt of such a brief until defendant mailed an additional copy with her motion to correct court error, received on July 25, 2008. Upon review of the defendant's submissions, the court finds it is in the interest of justice that the recommendation entered on July 11, 2008 (doc. 62) be vacated and the government be directed to respond to the defendant's arguments, as more fully explained in her reply brief. Of particular interest to the court is defendant's argument concerning her criminal history and the application of career offender status as determined by the district court at sentencing.
Defendant's arguments in her initial motion were so abbreviated and vague that they were virtually impossible to discern. The explanation in her reply brief provides significantly more guidance with respect to the details of her claims.
Accordingly it is ORDERED:
The recommendation entered on July 11, 2008 (doc. 62) is hereby VACATED.
The defendant's motion to correct court administrative error (doc. 63) is GRANTED to the extent this order has issued.
Within 60 days from the date of this order, the government shall respond to the arguments more fully set forth in defendant's reply brief.
At Pensacola, Florida.