CONCLUSION In light of the foregoing, the government prays that this Court enter an order summarily denying Alvarez relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Respectfully submitted, KENNETH MAGIDSON United States Attorney /s/ James L. Turner JAMES L. TURNER Assistant United States Attorney Texas Bar No. 20316950 Federal ID No. 1406 Attorneys for Respondent 1000 Louisiana Street, Ste 2300 Houston, TX 77002 (713) 567-9102 Case 7:15-cv-00280 Document 6 Filed in TXSD on 01/25/16 Page 89 of 90 90 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, James L. Turner, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Response To Mariano Alvarez (Alvarez)=s Motion for Relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 has been served on January 25, 2016 via certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed to: Mr. Mariano Alvarez 94625-179 USP Allenwood P.O. Box 3000 White Deer, PA 17887 /s/ James L. Turner JAMES L. TURNER Assistant United States Attorney Case 7:15-cv-00280 Document 6 Filed in TXSD on 01/25/16 Page 90 of 90

Case: 4:16-cv-00945-RWS Doc. #: 1 Filed: 06/23/16 Page: 11 of 13 PageID #: 11 12 Mr. Buckner’s petition is timely under 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f)(3) because he filed it within one year of the Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson – a ruling that established a “substantive rule that has retroactive effect in cases on collateral review.” 11 Thus, Mr. Buckner respectfully requests that this Court grant his § 2255 motion, vacate his current sentence, and re-sentence him.

The claims thus should be denied without a hearing. Case 1:09-cv-00225-ARR-LB Document 10 Filed 04/13/09 Page 17 of 19 PageID #: 56 16 CONCLUSION Petitioner seeks the extraordinary remedy of a writ of coram nobis to correct trial errors that have not been raised on direct appeal (and therefore waived), or were addressed and rejected in prior proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. For the reasons set forth above, the petition should be denied.

C. This motion is timely under 28 U.S.C. § 22558(f)(3). This motion is timely under 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f)(3), which provides for a one-year limitation period to run from “the date on which the right asserted was initially recognized by the Supreme Court, if that right has been newly recognized by the Supreme Court and made retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review.” Case 1:16-cv-00105-JB-GJF Document 1 Filed 02/10/16 Page 9 of 10 10 The Supreme Court decided Johnson on June 26, 2015, and Mr. Lucero has filed his claim within a year of that date.

Case 1:15-cv-00881-JB-LAM Document 9 Filed 12/05/15 Page 20 of 23 21 D. IMPACT OF VACATING DEFENDANT’S COERCION AND ENTICEMENT CONVICTION ON HIS CHILD PORNOGRAPHY CONVICTION If a court determines that a defendant is entitled to relief under § 2255, then the statute requires that the court “vacate and set the judgment aside and ... discharge the prisoner or resentence him or grant a new trial or correct the sentence as may appear appropriate.” 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Assuming the Court vacates the Defendant’s conviction for coercion and enticement, the United States submits that the appropriate remedy would be resentencing on his remaining possession of child pornography conviction.

Since Mr. Gomez Ortiz does not challenge the manner in which the Bureau of Prisons has Case 2:10-cv-02482-CAS Document 7 Filed 06/24/10 Page 11 of 12 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 12 executed his sentence, the government’s characterization of the motion as a habeas petition pursuant to §2241 is incorrect. The Court has the authority pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to correct Mr. Gomez Ortiz’s sentence by departing downward under §5G1.3(b) for pre-custody time not awarded by the Bureau of Prisons. Even though the Bureau correctly awarded Willis credit, the Bureau did not award Mr. Gomez Ortiz credit for 604 days that he spent in presentence confinement.

V. PRAYER FOR RELIEF / CONCLUSION For the reasons stated herein, Mr. Black’s conviction is constitutionally-unsound, in violation of his rights under the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments. Mr. Black requests that this Court grant his motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 or, in the alternative, for a writ of error coram nobis to issue, vacating the conviction and sentence previously imposed and dismissing the indictment against him. 108 Case: 1:12-cv-04306 Document #: 4 Filed: 06/04/12 Page 72 of 74 PageID #:77 63 It is too late to turn back the clock and to restore the deprivation of Mr. Black’s Constitutionally-guaranteed right to counsel of choice.

For that reason, Hasbajrami cannot establish good cause for discovery on the ground that it would be helpful in challenging the lawfulness of the Section 702 collection. Moreover, Hasbajrami also is barred from bringing a constitutional or statutory challenge to the Section 702 collection because Hasbajrami’s plea agreement expressly provided that, “The defendant agrees not to file an appeal or otherwise challenge, by petition Case 1:13-cv-06852-JG Document 25 Filed 08/08/14 Page 26 of 47 PageID #: 189 19 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 or any other provision, the conviction or sentence in the event that the Court imposes a term of imprisonment of 15 years or below. . . . The defendant waives any right to additional disclosure from the government in connection with the guilty plea.”

Respectfully submitted, Date: Reg. No. 08174-028 USPMarion P.O. Box 1000 Marion, IL 62959 Appearing Pro Se 22 Case 3:09-cv-00139-RLY-WGH Document 32 Filed 06/16/14 Page 22 of 23 PageID #: 165 DECLARATION OF DEMARKO KEMP I, DeMarko Kemp, declarant herein, declare and attest to the facts in the above and foregoing Motion under 28 U. S. C § 2255 (f) (3) to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody to be true and correct to the best of my knowledge under the penalty ofperjury pursuant to 28 U. S. C. § 1746. DATED: June it) ,2014 Certificate of Service I hereby certify that I mailed one copy of my Objection to Court's Review and Report with first class U.S. Postage prepaid and affixed thereon to the Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Indiana, Evansville Division.

On the second day of deliberations, the jury found Jiau guilty of Securities Fraud and conspiracy to commit Securities Fraud. F. COURT’S AUTHORITY Title 28 U.S.C. §2255, grants the District Court authority to entertain post- judgment motions by prisoners attacking criminal sentences claiming the right to be released upon the ground that sentence was imposed in violation of the U. S. Constitution or laws of the United States, or that the sentence is in excess of the maximum authorized by law. See Hill v. United States, 368 U.S. 424 ( 1962 ) ( noting the “exceptional circumstances where the need for the remedy afforded by the writ is apparent” ).