Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. MORGAN, 2:13-CR-20035. (2015)

Court: District Court, W.D. Arkansas Number: infdco20150810836 Visitors: 13
Filed: Aug. 07, 2015
Latest Update: Aug. 07, 2015
Summary: ORDER P.K. HOLMES, III , Chief District Judge . Currently before the Court are Defendant Thomas Harold Morgan's motions to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. 2255 (Doc. 34); to appoint counsel (Doc. 41); and to pursue discovery (Doc. 44). The United States filed a response (Doc. 43) to the motion to vacate. Magistrate Judge James R. Marschewski then filed a report and recommendations (Doc. 45) recommending that all of Morgan's motions be denied. After the report and recommendations were
More

ORDER

Currently before the Court are Defendant Thomas Harold Morgan's motions to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Doc. 34); to appoint counsel (Doc. 41); and to pursue discovery (Doc. 44). The United States filed a response (Doc. 43) to the motion to vacate. Magistrate Judge James R. Marschewski then filed a report and recommendations (Doc. 45) recommending that all of Morgan's motions be denied. After the report and recommendations were filed, Morgan filed a reply (Doc. 46) to the Government's response to his motion to vacate. Morgan did not file any objections to the report and recommendations.

The Court has conducted a de novo review, and whether Morgan's reply is considered as a reply or instead is construed as objections to the report and recommendations, the Court concludes that the report and recommendations should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted as this Court's findings in all respects in their entirety.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Thomas Harold Morgan's motions to vacate his sentence (Doc. 34), appoint him counsel (Doc. 41), and allow him to pursue discovery (Doc. 44) are DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer