Pinkston v. U.S., CR606-026. (2018)
Court: District Court, S.D. Georgia
Number: infdco20180501887
Visitors: 22
Filed: Apr. 27, 2018
Latest Update: Apr. 27, 2018
Summary: ORDER J. RANDAL HALL , Chief District Judge . After a careful de novo review of the record in this case, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation(R&R), to which no objections have been filed. Accordingly, the R&R is ADOPTED, and this case is DISMISSED. Further, a prisoner seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. 2255 must obtain a certificate of appealability ("COA") before appealing the denial of his application for writ of habeas corpus. 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(
Summary: ORDER J. RANDAL HALL , Chief District Judge . After a careful de novo review of the record in this case, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation(R&R), to which no objections have been filed. Accordingly, the R&R is ADOPTED, and this case is DISMISSED. Further, a prisoner seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. 2255 must obtain a certificate of appealability ("COA") before appealing the denial of his application for writ of habeas corpus. 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(1..
More
ORDER
J. RANDAL HALL, Chief District Judge.
After a careful de novo review of the record in this case, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation(R&R), to which no objections have been filed. Accordingly, the R&R is ADOPTED, and this case is DISMISSED.
Further, a prisoner seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 must obtain a certificate of appealability ("COA") before appealing the denial of his application for writ of habeas corpus. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B). This Court "must issue or deny a certificate of appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the applicant." Rule 11(a) to the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings. This Court should grant a COA only if the prisoner makes a "substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). For the reasons set forth in the Report and Recommendation, and in consideration of the standards enunciated in Slack V. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 482-84 (2000), movant has failed to make the requisite showing. Accordingly, a COA is DENIED in this case.1 Moreover, because there are no non-frivolous issues to raise on appeal, an appeal would not be taken in good faith. Accordingly, movant is not entitled to appeal in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).
FootNotes
1. "If the court denies a certificate,[a party] may not appeal the denial but may seek a certificate from the court of appeals under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22." Rule 11(a) to the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings.
Source: Leagle
