Dillard v. The United States of America, No. 7:2013cv00368 - Document 4 (W.D. Va. 2013)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Glen E. Conrad on 8/23/2013. (tvt)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
nlPRK' OFFI U..Dl X tr B CE s sm l ATROANOKE, VA FI LED AL 23 2 1 6 93 I THE UNI N TED STATES DI STRI CO URT CT FO R TH E W ESTERN DI STRI OF VI I A CT RG NI ROANOKE DI SI VI ON CORBY R W DI LLARD, JULA C I BY: D C RK CASE NO.7: 13CV00368 Pettone ii r, M EM OM NDUM OPI ON NI VS. THE UNI TED STATES OF AM ERI CA, By: G ln E.Conr e ad Chi fUnie St esDit i tJudge e t d at src R e ponde . s nt Cor y Ra Dilr a f r li ae pr e ng pr K ,fl d t s pe ii f r a wrtof b y la d, ede a nm t oce di o ie hi tton o i . e e he e d, he i ha ha ascopus purua t 28 U. C.j2241. Upon r viw oft r cor t courtfnds t t be r , s nt o S. t i p tto mu t eds se wi o t rj d c . h s eiin s b imis d t u p eu ie h Dil di i re aedi afdea prs i Norh Caolna Or na iy,aj2241peii lar s ncac r t n e rl ion n t r i . di rl tton mus be fld i t Unie St esDiti Cour whe e t de e nti confne l r J s t ie n he td at srct t r he f nda s i d. n e one , 2 6F.d 3 8 3 2 ( t Ci. 0 0 . l h speiin, o v r Di ad a p ae t b c alngn 2 3 2 , 3 4h r 2 0 ) n i t o h we e, l r p e r d o e h l ig t l e t ev ldt o tej d me te tr db t sc ur,c n itn a d s ne i t d fn a to a h aiiy f h u g n ne e y hi o t o vcig n e tncng he ee d n n f de alc i i lofe e. Se Unied Stt v. la d,Cas No. 07CR00023. By or ren e e e r rm na f ns e t a es Dilr e 4: de t r d Augus 9,201 t c tco t e Dil r s s ison as a m oto t va t s t asde or t 3, he our nsnz d la d' ubm s i i n o cae, e i c re t s ne c t e 28 U. C. j2 5 a d g a td Dilr tn d y t o jc t t i o rc e tn e md r S. 25 , n rn e lad e a s o be t o hs c t ci ort s ta j2255 moton sai hi cai and dic sng t i tmei s onsnzton o ubmi i ttng s l ms susi her i lnes unde j22554 I r pons t t c tsor r Dilr hasno s te a j2255moton, r 9. n es e o he our' de , lad w ubmitd i whih has bee doc t d i t c i i lpr e ng,Cms No.4: c n ke e n he rm na oce di e 07CR00023. As a lf t r 1 urhe a ton on Dilr scai andr ltd moi wiloc uri t tc e,t sa to unde j2241 ci lad' l ms eae tons l c n ha as hi cin r wil eds se wi u p eu c .Ana p o raeo d rwi is et i d y. lb imis d t t rj die ho p r p it r e l su h s a l The Cl r i diec e t s nd c e of t s memor ndlm o ni n a a ompa ng e k s r t d o e opi s hi a l pi o nd cc nyi or rt pe ii r de o ttone . ENTER:Ths A6> d yo Au ut2 3. i a f g s, 01 ChifUnie St t sDititJ e t d a e src udge 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
