Free Order - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

MDR

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Michael Craig Anderson, Defendant/Movant.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. CR 04-1281-PHX-DGC No. CV 07-1947-PHX-DGC (LOA) ORDER

Movant Michael Craig Anderson, who is confined in the Federal Prison Camp-La
15

Tuna in Anthony, New Mexico, filed a pro se "Motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate,
16

Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody" (Doc. #139).
17

I.
18 19

Procedural History Pursuant to a plea agreement, Movant pled guilty to Receiving a Bribe by a Public

Official, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 201(b)(2)(C); Conspiracy to Import More than 1000
20

Kilograms of Marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952(a), 960(b)(1)(G), and 963; Money
21

Laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1957; and Filing a False Tax Return, in violation of
22

28 U.S.C. § 7206(1). The plea agreement provided for a sentencing range of 60 to 108
23

months. On October 11, 2006, the Court sentenced Movant to concurrent terms of
24

imprisonment, the longest of which were 108 months.
25

II.
26 27

Section 2255 Motion In his Motion, Movant raises two grounds for relief. In Ground One, he alleges that

his attorney "failed to argue and preserve the issue that some of the drug quantity listed in
28
TERMPSREF

Case 2:04-cr-01281-DGC

Document 141

Filed 12/07/2007

Page 1 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
TERMPSREF

the PSI was not part of" the conspiracy to which he pled guilty. In Ground Two, Movant alleges that his attorney promised Movant that he would receive a 60-month sentence because his attorney had spoken to the prosecutor about the case. Movant also contends that he asked his attorney to appeal the sentence, but his attorney ignored Movant's request to file an appeal. The Court will require a response to the § 2255 Motion. III. Warnings A. Address Changes

Movant must file and serve a notice of a change of address in accordance with Rule 83.3(d) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure. Movant must not include a motion for other relief with a notice of change of address. Failure to comply may result in dismissal of this action. B. Copies

Movant must serve Respondent, or counsel if an appearance has been entered, a copy of every document that he files. Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(a). Each filing must include a certificate stating that a copy of the filing was served. Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(d). Also, Movant must submit an additional copy of every filing for use by the Court. LRCiv 5.4. Failure to comply may result in the filing being stricken without further notice to Movant. C. Possible Dismissal

If Movant fails to timely comply with every provision of this Order, including these warnings, the Court may dismiss this action without further notice. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992) (a district court may dismiss an action for failure to comply with any order of the Court). IT IS ORDERED: (1) The Clerk of Court must serve a copy of the § 2255 Motion (Doc. #139 in 04-

CR-1281-PHX-DGC) and this Order on the United States Attorney for the District of Arizona. (2) The United States Attorney for the District of Arizona has 60 days from the

date of service within which to answer the Motion. The United States Attorney may file an
Case 2:04-cr-01281-DGC Document 141 -2Filed 12/07/2007 Page 2 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
TERMPSREF

answer limited to relevant affirmative defenses, including but not limited to, statute of limitations, procedural bar, or non-retroactivity. If the answer is limited to affirmative defenses, only those portions of the record relevant to those defenses need be attached to the answer. Failure to set forth an affirmative defense in an answer may be treated as a waiver of the defense. Day v. McDonough, 126 S. Ct. 1675, 1684 (2006). If not limited to affirmative defenses, the answer must fully comply with all of the requirements of Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Cases. (3) (4) Movant may file a reply within 30 days from the date of service of the answer. The matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Lawrence O. Anderson pursuant to

Rules 72.1 and 72.2 of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure for further proceedings and a report and recommendation. DATED this 7th day of December, 2007.

Case 2:04-cr-01281-DGC

Document 141

-3Filed 12/07/2007

Page 3 of 3