DOE v. U.S., 2:11-cr-00136-GZS (2017)
Court: District Court, D. Maine
Number: infdco20170201b22
Visitors: 15
Filed: Jan. 31, 2017
Latest Update: Jan. 31, 2017
Summary: ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE GEORGE Z. SINGAL , District Judge . No objections having been filed to the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision (ECF No. 169) filed November 15, 2016, the Recommended Decision is AFFIRMED. Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows: 1. An evidentiary hearing is not warranted under Rule 8 of the Rules Governing Section 2255 cases; 2. Petitioner's Motion for habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. 2255 (ECF No. 139, as suppleme
Summary: ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE GEORGE Z. SINGAL , District Judge . No objections having been filed to the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision (ECF No. 169) filed November 15, 2016, the Recommended Decision is AFFIRMED. Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows: 1. An evidentiary hearing is not warranted under Rule 8 of the Rules Governing Section 2255 cases; 2. Petitioner's Motion for habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. 2255 (ECF No. 139, as supplemen..
More
ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
GEORGE Z. SINGAL, District Judge.
No objections having been filed to the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision (ECF No. 169) filed November 15, 2016, the Recommended Decision is AFFIRMED.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows:
1. An evidentiary hearing is not warranted under Rule 8 of the Rules Governing Section 2255 cases;
2. Petitioner's Motion for habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. §2255 (ECF No. 139, as supplemented by ECF No. 159) is hereby DISMISSED;
3. A certificate of appealability is DENIED pursuant to Rule 11 of the Rules Governing Section 2255 cases because there is no substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. §2253(c)(2).
Source: Leagle
