UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION. No. 3:75-CR-26-F No. 5:06-CV-24-F

Similar documents
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION 3:75-CR :06-CV-24-F

Case 3:05-cv Document 22 Filed 06/09/2006 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

NO CV. In the Court of Appeals. For the Third Supreme Judicial District of Texas. Austin, Texas JAMES BOONE

herein, counsel will move this Court before the Honorable Denny Chin, United States District

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 1 5 H rfjhe GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO: 2015-CA COA VICTOR BYAS AND MARY BYAS CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PARTIES

Case 2:05-cr LHT-DLH Document 33 Filed 11/01/2007 Page 1 of 6

Case Doc 450 Filed 01/29/19 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA DURHAM DIVISION

Defendants hereby move for a stay of all case deadlines in the abovecaptioned. 1. At the end of the day on December 21, 2018, the appropriations act

Case 2:13-cv Document 995 Filed in TXSD on 02/22/17 Page 1 of 6

Case 1:16-cv TSC Document 9 Filed 09/20/16 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT DEFEENDANT-APPELLEE S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME

Case 2:16-cv SWS Document 129 Filed 06/20/17 Page 1 of 8

MARGARET DICKSON, et al., ) Plaintiffs ) ) v. ) 11 CVS ) ROBERT RUCHO, et al., ) Defendants )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - SACRAMENTO DIVISION } } } } } } } } } } } } } } /

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION. Case No. 5:07-CV-231

COMES NOW Defendant Blue Ridge Bone & Joint Clinic, P.A. ( BRBJ ), pursuant to Rule

ORAL ARGUMENT PREVIOUSLY SCHEDULED MARCH 31, No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Case 1:10-cv SS Document 465 Filed 12/06/13 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

12 CVS. Scenic NC, Inc., ) Plaintiff ) ) ) North Carolina Department of MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER. ) Transportation, ) Defendant )

ORAL ARGUMENT PREVIOUSLY SCHEDULED MARCH 31, No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Case 4:17-cv HSG Document 180 Filed 12/26/18 Page 1 of 3

Case 3:04-cv Document 32 Filed 08/29/2005 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION

Case4:13-cv JSW Document112 Filed05/05/14 Page1 of 3

Smith v. RJM Acquisitions Funding, LLC Doc. 35 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION. Criminal No. 5:06-CR-136-1D Civil No.

3:18-cv JMC Date Filed 07/03/18 Entry Number 8 Page 1 of 6

- 1 - DISTRICT 29A NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS ***************************************** ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO.2014-CA COA

Case 2:07-cv MJP Document 22 Filed 04/10/2008 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

ORAL ARGUMENT PREVIOUSLY SCHEDULED MARCH 31, No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Attorneys for Defendant Sue Lowden 9

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA ERNEST TAYLOR CIVIL ACTION THE CITY OF BATON ROUGE, ET AL. NO.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI CENTRAL DIVISION

Case pwb Doc 1097 Filed 11/26/14 Entered 11/26/14 10:26:12 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 9

Case 3:75-cr F Document 266 Filed 06/08/12 Page 1 of 8

Case 2:16-cv NDF Document 29 Filed 03/23/17 Page 1 of 9

E-Filed Document May :25: CA Pages: 18. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI No.: 2013-CA-01006

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION 3:14-cv-213 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF NEWTON COUNTY, ARKANSAS CIVIL DIVISION THE ARKANSAS POLLUTION CONTROL AND ECOLOGY COMMISSION'S RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF APPEAL

Defendant. Come Now Defendant Blue Ridge Bone & Joint Clinic, P.A. ( Clinic ) and responds

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION. v. CIVIL ACTION NO. H MEMORANDUM OPINION

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. ELOUISE PEPION COBELL, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees,

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION. No. 5:09-CT D ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

Case 2:15-cv DN-BCW Document 111 Filed 11/04/16 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION

Case 1:09-cv JCH-DJS Document 91 Filed 07/26/10 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

Case 1:15-cv IMK Document 8 Filed 07/21/15 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 137

IN THE TENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CHURCHILL

Case 1:16-cv EGS Document 21 Filed 07/05/16 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case DOT Doc 12 Filed 12/12/11 Entered 12/12/11 16:02:14 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 8

2:12-cv MOB-MKM Doc # 107 Filed 11/12/14 Pg 1 of 7 Pg ID 1470

Case , Document 34-1, 03/18/2016, , Page1 of 1

3:18-cv JMC Date Filed 07/03/18 Entry Number 7 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR STAY PENDING SUPREME COURT PROCEEDINGS

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 5:16-cv CAR Document 19 Filed 05/25/17 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

14 th JUDICIAL DISTRICT DISTRICT COURT DIVISION GENERAL CIVIL RULES

v. Civil Action No. 1:13-cv-861

NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS *************************************** STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ) ) v. ) From Wilkes ) AMANDA LEA ROSE )

Case 4:18-cv JM Document 11 Filed 06/13/18 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION

Supreme Court of the United States

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Cost Per Lead Program Agreement

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

U.S. District Court. Middle District of Florida

Hells Angels Motorcycle Corporation v. Alexander McQueen Trading Limited et al Doc. 16

STIPULATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT 05-CV-274-HA

DOCKET NO. E-100, SUB 157. NOW COMES NC WARN Inc. ("NC WARN"), by and through undersigned

INSTRUCTIONS TO RESPONDENT

Lawrence Walker v. Comm Social Security

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA NORTHERN DIVISION No. 2:14-CR-14-D-1

Case KJC Doc 255 Filed 12/04/18 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Chapter 11

THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA **************************************************

Defendant: PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY COURT USE ONLY Counsel for Plaintiff: Marc R. Levy, #11372

Case 9:17-cv WPD Document 98 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/19/2017 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

Case 1:06-cv JR Document 25 Filed 02/01/2008 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 3:02-cv AVC Document 67 Filed 09/20/2005 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

2:15-cv CSB-EIL # 297 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS URBANA DIVISION

V. NO KA COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI MOTION FOR REHEARING STANDARD OF REVIEW ARGUMENT

12PREM;^O ^, Q^0 APR CLERK OFCOURT IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY AT FRANKFORT CIVIL ACTION NO.: KKC MEMORANDUM ORDER

STATE OF CONNECTICUT LABOR DEPARTMENT CONNECTICUT STATE BOARD OF LABOR RELATIONS

Transcription:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION No. 3:75-CR-26-F No. 5:06-CV-24-F UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ) v. ) GOVERNMENT=S RESPONSE TO ) MOVANT=S MOTION TO EXTEND TIME JEFFREY R. MacDONALD, ) Movant ) The United States of America, by and through the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of North Carolina, hereby submits this response to Movant=s AMotion to Extend Time, filed September 15, 2014, [DE-359] and, in opposition to said motion, respectfully shows unto the Court the following: 1. On July 24, 2014, this Court issued an Order [DE-354] denying the movant s motions pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255. In that order, the Court indicated that a ruling on movant s separate motion under the Innocence Protection Act (18 U.S.C 3600) would be forthcoming. DE-354 at 13 n.7. 2. On August 17, 2014, Government counsel received an email from Mr. Gordon Widenhouse, counsel for movant, asking for the Government s consent to a 20-day extension of the time within which to file a motion to alter/amend the judgment on the 2255 claims, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59. 3. On August 18, 2014, the Government replied by email that it would not oppose such an extension, as long as it applied to both parties. In that email, the Government noted that its research indicates that the order denying the motion under the IPA is, like the [ ] 2255 order, 1 Case 3:75-cr-00026-F Document 360 Filed 09/15/14 Page 1 of 5

civil in nature, so the same rules and deadlines would apply to it. The 28-day deadline would expire on September 5, 2014. Do you anticipate filing a [Fed. R. Civ. P.] 59(e) motion in that matter? See United States v. Pugh, 426 Fed.Appx. 876, 2011 WL 1900724, at **1 n.1 (11th Cir. May 20, 2011). Government counsel did not receive an answer to that question. 4. On August 19, 2014, Mr. Widenhouse notified the Government by email that he had determined that the 28-day deadline for the filing of a Rule 59(e) motion could not be extended and that he would try to file such a motion timely on August 19, 2014, which he did. See DE-357. The Government timely responded on September 11, 2014. DE-358. 5. On September 3, 2014, Government counsel received a voicemail message from Ms. Christine Mumma, N.C. Center on Actual Innocence, stating that she was working on asking for an extension on a reply to the judge s order on the IPA claim for approximately 30 days. She also indicated that she was going to be moving to withdraw from the case. 6. Later on September 3, 2014, a counsel for the Government spoke with Ms. Mumma and explained that the Government believed that this was governed by Rules 59(e) and 6(b)(2), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and, therefore, the Government could not consent to the extension of a deadline that could not be extended. Ms. Mumma indicated that she would not be filing a motion. 7. Today, movant filed a motion seeking to extend the time upon which to file an appeal to this Court s order entered on August 8, 2014. [DE-356]. DE-359 at 1. The U.S. Attorney s Office has not had any communication with Ms. Mumma or her office on this case since September 3, 2014, and has not discussed with her a proposed motion to extend the time within which to file a notice of appeal from DE-356. 8. The Government submits that motions filed under the IPA are civil in nature and 2 Case 3:75-cr-00026-F Document 360 Filed 09/15/14 Page 2 of 5

are governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure (FRAP) governing civil cases. Pursuant to FRAP 4(a)(1)(B)(i), the time within which to file a notice of appeal is within sixty (60) days after entry of the judgment or order appealed from. Accordingly, the deadline for filing a notice of appeal from DE-356 would be October 7, 2014. The Government respectfully disagrees that the deadline for filing a Notice of Appeal has passed. DE-359 at 2. 9. The Government respectfully submits that the movant should be able to decide by October 7, 2014, whether to note an appeal from DE-356, and thus cannot show excusable neglect or good cause why that deadline should be extended under FRAP 4(b)(4). 1 10. In light of Ms. Mumma s statements to Government counsel on September 3, 2014, and the averments of 1-2 of DE-359, the Government respectfully submits that Ms. Mumma should clarify with the Court her counsel status with respect to this case. < This space intentionally left blank. > 1 The undersigned counsel for the Government have no information regarding the assertions in 4 of the movant s motion (DE-359 at 1-2). 3 Case 3:75-cr-00026-F Document 360 Filed 09/15/14 Page 3 of 5

For the foregoing reasons, the Government respectfully requests that movant s motion to extend time (DE-359) be denied. Respectfully submitted, this 15th day of September, 2014. THOMAS G. WALKER United States Attorney BY: /s/ John Stuart Bruce JOHN STUART BRUCE First Assistant U.S. Attorney E-mail: john.bruce@usdoj.gov North Carolina Bar No. 8200 BY: /s/ Brian M. Murtagh BRIAN M. MURTAGH Special Assistant U.S. Attorney E-mail: brian.murtagh2@usdoj.gov D.C. Bar No. 108480 BY: /s/ Leslie K. Cooley LESLIE K. COOLEY Assistant U.S. Attorney E-mail: leslie.cooley@usdoj.gov North Carolina Bar No. 33871 4 Case 3:75-cr-00026-F Document 360 Filed 09/15/14 Page 4 of 5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have this date served a copy of the foregoing document upon the defendant in this action either electronically or by placing a copy of same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, and addressed to counsel for defendant as follows: M. Gordon Widenhouse, Jr. Keith A. Williams Attorney at Law Attorney at Law 312 W. Franklin Street P.O. Box 1965 Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27516 Greenville, N.C. 27835 Phone: 919-967-4900 Phone: (252) 931-9362 Christine C. Mumma N.C. Center on Actual Innocence P.O. Box 52446 Durham, NC 27717-2446 Phone: 919-489-3268 This, the 15 th day of September, 2012. THOMAS G. WALKER United States Attorney BY: /s/ John Stuart Bruce BY: /s/ Brian M. Murtagh JOHN STUART BRUCE BRIAN M. MURTAGH First Assistant U.S. Attorney Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Ph. 919-856-4530; Fax: 919-856-4487 E-mail: brian.murtagh2@usdoj.gov E-mail: john.bruce@usdoj.gov; Ph. 919-856-4530; Fax: 919-856-4487 N.C. Bar No. 8200 D.C. Bar No. 108480 BY: /s/ Leslie K. Cooley LESLIE K. COOLEY Assistant U.S. Attorney Ph. 919-856-4530; Fax: 919-856-4487 E-mail: leslie.cooley@usdoj.gov N.C. Bar No. 33871 5 Case 3:75-cr-00026-F Document 360 Filed 09/15/14 Page 5 of 5