Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Nebel, 2:08-cr-0212-TLN-EFB. (2020)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20200130954 Visitors: 16
Filed: Jan. 27, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 27, 2020
Summary: ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . Movant Daniel Michael Nebel, Jr. ("Movant") moved to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255. (ECF No. 642.) The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On October 28, 2019, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings a
More

ORDER

Movant Daniel Michael Nebel, Jr. ("Movant") moved to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. (ECF No. 642.) The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On October 28, 2019, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 670.) Neither party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

The Court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge's analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY

1. The findings and recommendations filed October 28, 2019 (ECF No. 670), are adopted in full, with the exception of Section I of the Analysis, Pro Se Filings1;

2. Movant's motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence (ECF No. 642) is DISMISSED pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings in the District Courts;

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close the companion civil case, No. 2:19-cv-0156-TLN-EFB; and

4. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. It appears Attorney Mia Crager indeed represented Movant at the time the present motion was filed. She was terminated as counsel on March 26, 2019, when J. Toney was appointed to represent Movant concerning revocation of his supervised release. It is not clear to the Court, however, that Ms. Crager represented Movant for purposes of filing the present motion, such that Movant was not entitled to file it on his own behalf. The Court therefore declines to adopt that portion of the findings and recommendations. This does not, however, alter the remainder of the analysis or the ultimate conclusions set forth in the findings and recommendations, which are otherwise adopted in full.
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer