ORDER

KRISTI K. DuBOSE, District Judge.

After due and proper consideration of all pleadings in this file, and a de novo determination of those portions of the recommendation to which objection is made, the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) is adopted as the opinion of this Court.

Woodgett filed this petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2255, alleging that his sentence should not have been enhanced by application of the Armed Career Criminal Act. The Eleventh Circuit recently addressed this question in Spencer v. United States, 2014 WL 6234529 at *1 (11th Cir. 2014) holding: "Section 2255 does not provide a remedy for every alleged error in conviction and sentencing. When a prisoner . . . alleges that his sentence was imposed in violation of the . . . laws of the United States . . . or is otherwise subject to collateral attack, a district court lacks the authority to review the alleged error unless the claimed error constitute[s] a fundamental defect which inherently results in a complete miscarriage of justice," Id. at. *4 (internal quotations and citations omitted). The Circuit Court then explained that the "erroneous[] designati[on] [of] a defendant as a career offender is not a fundamental defect that inherently results in a complete miscarriage of justice." Id. at *11.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Petitioner's Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence (Doc. 32) is DENIED. It is further ORDERED that Petitioner is not entitled to a Certificate of Appealability, and therefore, not entitled to appeal in forma pauperis.