Serving Chicago For 18 Years

Oral Arguments Set in Case Challenging Restitution Order Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255

For Immediate Release: October 17, 2013

Contact: Craig M. Sandberg, 312.263.7249, craig@muslin-sandberg.com

Kansas City, MO – This is an appeal by Petitioner from the district court’s Judgment and Order dated October 26, 2012, denying a Petition filed by Petitioner pursuant to 28 U.S.C § 2255. On April 3, 2013, the Court granted a certificate of appealability to include the following questions: (1) whether counsel was ineffective for failing to question the amount of the restitution order and (2) whether counsel was ineffective for failing to ascertain the whereabouts of the seized money.

The only question before the court is whether, in light of the Circuit’s decision in Matheny v. Morrison, 307 F.3d 709 (8th Cir. 2002), a petitioner may challenge a restitution order under § 2255 even though she is not claiming a right to be released from custody. In other words,Petitioner’s challenge strikes at the heart of the language in Matheny. Is it controlling or is it mere obiter dictum?

WHAT: Oral arguments begin in Shephard v. United States (Docket No. 12-3709)

WHO: Craig M. Sandberg will argue for Petitioner, before a panel of judges in United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit (Division I). Mr. Sandberg represents the petitioner pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act (“CJA”), Title 18, United States Code, §3006A the Criminal Justice Act (“CJA”), having been appointed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

WHEN: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 at 9:00 a.m.

WHERE: Charles Evans Whittaker Courthouse, Court of Appeals Courtroom, 400 East 9th Street, 10th Floor, Kansas City, Missouri

Categories: Blog

For More Information

Fill out our online form