United States v. Lucas, 3:15cr69/TKW/EMT (2020)
Court: District Court, N.D. Florida
Number: infdco20200310b45
Visitors: 8
Filed: Mar. 09, 2020
Latest Update: Mar. 09, 2020
Summary: ORDER T. KENT WETHERELL, II , District Judge . This case is before the Court based on the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (Doc. 122) and Defendant's objections (Doc. 123). Based on my de novo review of the issues raised in the objections, I agree with the magistrate judge's determination that the claims in Defendant's 2255 motion are refuted by the plea colloquy. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that: 1. The magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporat
Summary: ORDER T. KENT WETHERELL, II , District Judge . This case is before the Court based on the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (Doc. 122) and Defendant's objections (Doc. 123). Based on my de novo review of the issues raised in the objections, I agree with the magistrate judge's determination that the claims in Defendant's 2255 motion are refuted by the plea colloquy. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that: 1. The magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporate..
More
ORDER
T. KENT WETHERELL, II, District Judge.
This case is before the Court based on the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (Doc. 122) and Defendant's objections (Doc. 123). Based on my de novo review of the issues raised in the objections, I agree with the magistrate judge's determination that the claims in Defendant's § 2255 motion are refuted by the plea colloquy. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that:
1. The magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated by reference in this Order.
2. Defendant's motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence (Doc. 111) is DENIED.
3. A certificate of appealability is DENIED.
DONE and ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
