FRANCIS v. U.S., 1:15-0010. (2015)
Court: District Court, M.D. Tennessee
Number: infdco20150922b67
Visitors: 6
Filed: Sep. 21, 2015
Latest Update: Sep. 21, 2015
Summary: ORDER KEVIN H. SHARP , Chief District Judge . The Court has before it a pro se prisoner Motion (Docket Entry No. 1) under 28 U.S.C. 2255, to vacate, set aside or correct sentence, and the government's Response (Docket Entry No. 31) to the Motion. In accordance with the Memorandum contemporaneously entered, the Court finds no merit in the plaintiff's Motion. Accordingly, said Motion is DENIED and this action is hereby DISMISSED. Rule 8(a), Rules ___ 2255 Cases. Should the petitioner
Summary: ORDER KEVIN H. SHARP , Chief District Judge . The Court has before it a pro se prisoner Motion (Docket Entry No. 1) under 28 U.S.C. 2255, to vacate, set aside or correct sentence, and the government's Response (Docket Entry No. 31) to the Motion. In accordance with the Memorandum contemporaneously entered, the Court finds no merit in the plaintiff's Motion. Accordingly, said Motion is DENIED and this action is hereby DISMISSED. Rule 8(a), Rules ___ 2255 Cases. Should the petitioner ..
More
ORDER
KEVIN H. SHARP, Chief District Judge.
The Court has before it a pro se prisoner Motion (Docket Entry No. 1) under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, to vacate, set aside or correct sentence, and the government's Response (Docket Entry No. 31) to the Motion.
In accordance with the Memorandum contemporaneously entered, the Court finds no merit in the plaintiff's Motion. Accordingly, said Motion is DENIED and this action is hereby DISMISSED. Rule 8(a), Rules ___ § 2255 Cases.
Should the petitioner file a timely Notice of Appeal, such Notice shall be treated as an application for a certificate of appealability, 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c), which will NOT issue because the petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right.
It is so ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
