U.S. v. ORR, 2:00CR10067. (2012)
Court: District Court, W.D. Virginia
Number: infdco20120327893
Visitors: 4
Filed: Mar. 23, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 23, 2012
Summary: ORDER JAMES P. JONES, District Judge. For the reasons set forth in the Opinion accompanying this Final Order, it is ORDERED that the defendant's "MOTION FOR JUDICIAL RELIEF NEW DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE 60(B)(6)," which the court construes as a Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. 2255, is DENIED without prejudice as successive. Based upon the court's finding that the defendant has not made the requisite showing of denial of a substantial right, a
Summary: ORDER JAMES P. JONES, District Judge. For the reasons set forth in the Opinion accompanying this Final Order, it is ORDERED that the defendant's "MOTION FOR JUDICIAL RELIEF NEW DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE 60(B)(6)," which the court construes as a Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. 2255, is DENIED without prejudice as successive. Based upon the court's finding that the defendant has not made the requisite showing of denial of a substantial right, a ..
More
ORDER
JAMES P. JONES, District Judge.
For the reasons set forth in the Opinion accompanying this Final Order, it is ORDERED that the defendant's "MOTION FOR JUDICIAL RELIEF NEW DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE 60(B)(6)," which the court construes as a Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255, is DENIED without prejudice as successive. Based upon the court's finding that the defendant has not made the requisite showing of denial of a substantial right, a certificate of appealability is DENIED.
Source: Leagle
