Free AO 244 - Movant's Response as to why his motion under 28 USC § 2255 should not be barred under Rule 9 - Indiana

AO 244 (Rev. 5/85)

United States District Court
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

MOVANT'S RESPONSE AS TO WHY HIS MOTION UNDER 28 USC § 2255 SHOULD NOT BE BARRED UNDER RULE 9 District Case No.

V.
(name under which convicted)

Movant's Response as to Why His Motion Should Not be Barred Under Rule 9
Explanation and Instructions--Read Carefully (I) Rule 9. Delayed or Successive Motions. (a) Delayed motions. A motion for relief made pursuant to these rules may be dismissed if it appears that the government has been prejudiced in its ability to respond to the motion by delay in its filing unless the movant shows that it is based on grounds of which he could not have had knowledge by the exercise of reasonable diligence before the circumstances prejudicial to the government occurred. (b) Successive Motions. A second or successive motion may be dismissed if the judge finds that it fails to allege new or different grounds for relief and the prior determination was on the merits or, if new and different grounds are alleged, the judge finds that the failure of the movant to assert those grounds in a prior motion constituted an abuse of the procedure government by these rules. (II) Your motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence has been found to be subject to dismissal under rule 9 ( the following reason(s) ) for

(III)

This form has been sent so that you may explain why your motion contains the defect(s) noted in (II) above. It is required that you fill out this form and send it back to the court within days. Failure to do so will result in the automatic dismissal of your motion. When you have fully completed this form, the original and two copies must be mailed to the Clerk of the United States District Court whose address is This response must be legibly handwritten or typewritten, and signed by the movant under penalty of perjury. Any false statement of a material fact may serve as the basis for prosecution and conviction for perjury. All questions must be answered concisely in the proper space on the form. Additional pages are not permitted except with respect to the facts which you rely upon in Item 4 or 5 in the response. Any citation of authorities should be kept to an absolute minimum and is only appropriate if there has been a change in the law since the judgment you are attacking was rendered. Respond to 4 or 5, not to both, unless (II) above indicates that you must answer both sections.

(IV)

(V)

(VI)

(VII)

AO 244 (Rev. 5/85)

RESPONSE
1. Have you had the assistance of an attorney, other law-trained personnel, or writ writers since the conviction your motion is attacking was entered? Yes G 2. No G

If you checked "yes" above, specify as precisely as you can the period(s) of time during which you received such assistance, up to and including the present.

3.

Describe the nature of the assistance, including the names of those who rendered it to you.

4.

If your motion is in jeopardy because of delay prejudicial to the government under rule 9(a), explain why you feel the delay has not been prejudicial and/or why the delay is excusable under the terms of 9(a). This should be done by relying upon FACTS, not your opinions or conclusions.

5.

If your motion is in jeopardy under rule 9(b) because it asserts the same grounds as a previous motion, explain why you feel it deserves a reconsideration. If its fault under rule 9(b) is that it asserts new grounds which should have been included in a prior motion, explain why you are raising these grounds now rather than previously. Your explanation should rely on FACTS, not your opinion or conclusions.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on . (Date) Signature of Movant

Print

Save As...

Export as FDF

Retrieve FDF File

Reset