Government's Response in Opposition to Motions to Supplement and for Sequencing — United States v. Gladys Harun (3:23-cr-3) (S.D. Ga. No. 3:23-cr-00003)

Full text

    Case 3:23-cr-00003-DHB-BKE        Document 76      Filed 08/13/25   Page 1 of 3




                   IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                      SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
                             DUBLIN DIVISION

 GLADYS HARUN                                )
                                             )
              v.                             )          CR 323-003
                                             )
 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA                    )
                                             )

GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO HARUN’S MOTIONS TO
            SUPPLEMENT AND FOR SEQUENCING

      Harun moves the Court to: (1) expand the record under Rule 7 of the Rules

Governing Section 2255 proceedings; and (2) rule on her motion to expand 1 before

evaluating the Government’s motion to dismiss her 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. (Docs.

72 at 1, 3-4, 71; 73 at 1.) The Court should deny both motions.

      First, the Court should evaluate the Government’s motion to dismiss Harun’s

§ 2255 motion before ruling on her motion to expand because, “[i]n general, if a motion

is not dismissed, a judge may direct the parties to expand the record by submitting

additional materials relating to the motion.” Prada v. United States, 692 F. App’x

572, 574 (11th Cir. 2017) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 2255, Rule 7(a)) (emphasis added). “The

purpose is to enable the judge to dispose of some habeas petitions not dismissed on

the pleadings without the time and expense required for an evidentiary hearing.” Id.

      Second, the Court should deny Harun’s motion to expand because where the

record conclusively shows that the § 2255 petitioner is not entitled to relief, expanding



      1 Harun’s motion uses the term “supplement,” but Rule 7 discusses
“expand[ing]” the record. (Doc. 72 at 1-3, 71); 28 U.S.C. § 2255, Rule 7(a).
    Case 3:23-cr-00003-DHB-BKE        Document 76     Filed 08/13/25    Page 2 of 3




the record is unnecessary. See id. at 574-75 (citing 28 U.S.C. § 2255, Rule 7(a)). Here,

Harun seeks to expand the record to “demonstrate that the restitution order and

prison sentence rest on false premises,” and to support her “innocence of any financial

wrongdoing.” (Doc. 72 at 3-4.) However, as set forth in the Government’s motion to

dismiss, these claims are non-cognizable. (Doc. 68 at 22, 25). And, her other claims

are waived by her guilty plea, belied by the Rule 11 colloquy, and unavailing. (Doc.

68 at 16-25.) So, the record conclusively shows that Harun is not entitled to § 2255

relief. Therefore, her § 2255 motion should be dismissed and her motion to expand

should be denied.

                                        Respectfully submitted,

                                        TARA M. LYONS
                                        ACTING UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

                                        //s// Channell V. Singh
                                        Channell V. Singh
                                        Assistant United States Attorney
                                        Georgia Bar No. 216540
P.O. Box 8970
Savannah, Georgia 31412
(912) 652-4422




                                           2
    Case 3:23-cr-00003-DHB-BKE        Document 76      Filed 08/13/25   Page 3 of 3




                           CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

      This is to certify that I have on this day served all the parties in this case in

accordance with the notice of electronic filing (“NEF”) that was generated as a result

of electronic filing in this Court. Additionally, a copy has been mailed to:

      Gladys Harun
      192 Amelia Dr.
      Byron, GA 31008

      This August 13, 2025.

                                        Respectfully submitted,

                                        TARA M. LYONS
                                        ACTING UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

                                        //s// Channell V. Singh
                                        Channell V. Singh
                                        Assistant United States Attorney
                                        Georgia Bar No. 216540

Post Office Box 8970
Savannah, Georgia 31412
(912) 652-4422


File and source

File

gov.uscourts.gasd.89545.76.0.pdf

Size

109,949 bytes

SHA-256

a510d4a47cde435e26a320c7832eba05ec685317b31588d88b9501dc34a65ab9

Our copy

gov.uscourts.gasd.89545.76.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)