IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
November 4, 2010
LACY TILLEY, JR.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Donetta W. Ambrose Judge, U.S. District Court
Before the Court is Defendant's Motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 2255. In his Motion, Defendant makes several allegations, for which he proffers no evidence, and to which the Government does not respond. Rather than summarily rejecting those claims, I will afford Defendant an additional opportunity to develop his allegations, and the Government an opportunity to respond. I do this in accordance both with the principle that pro se filings are to be liberally construed, and with the importance of the safeguards afforded by habeas corpus proceedings.
In particular, Defendant may file a supplemental brief to expound on and particularize the circumstances surrounding the following allegations, and any pertinent evidence thereof: 1) his intention and failure to call witness Bob Gregorek, and the contention that Mr. Gregorek was threatened with prosecution if he were to testify; and 2) all pertinent facts and circumstances surrounding his alleged medical condition during trial. Defendant suggests that several of his allegations are supported in the record, but provides no citations. Defendant is apprised that the Court will not sua sponte comb the record in order to find support for his arguments.
Defendant may file a supplemental brief within twenty-one (21) days of today's date; the Government may respond within fourteen (14) days thereafter. In the meantime, the remainder of Defendant's Motion will be held in abeyance.
AND NOW, this 4th day of November, 2010, it is so ordered.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.