STANTON v. U.S., CR612-018 (2017)
Court: District Court, S.D. Georgia
Number: infdco20170412d97
Visitors: 8
Filed: Apr. 11, 2017
Latest Update: Apr. 11, 2017
Summary: ORDER J. RANDAL HALL , District Judge . After a careful de novo review of the record in this case, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (R&R), to which objections have been filed. Accordingly, the R&R is ADOPTED, and this case is DISMISSED with prejudice. Further, a prisoner seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. 2255 must obtain a certificate of appealability ("COA") before appealing the denial of his application for writ of habeas corpus. 28 U.S.C. 2
Summary: ORDER J. RANDAL HALL , District Judge . After a careful de novo review of the record in this case, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (R&R), to which objections have been filed. Accordingly, the R&R is ADOPTED, and this case is DISMISSED with prejudice. Further, a prisoner seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. 2255 must obtain a certificate of appealability ("COA") before appealing the denial of his application for writ of habeas corpus. 28 U.S.C. 22..
More
ORDER
J. RANDAL HALL, District Judge.
After a careful de novo review of the record in this case, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (R&R), to which objections have been filed. Accordingly, the R&R is ADOPTED, and this case is DISMISSED with prejudice.
Further, a prisoner seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 must obtain a certificate of appealability ("COA") before appealing the denial of his application for writ of habeas corpus. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B). This Court "must issue or deny a certificate of appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the applicant." Rule 11(a) to the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings. This Court should grant a COA only if the prisoner makes a "substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). For the reasons set forth in the Report and Recommendation, and in consideration of the standards enunciated in Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 482-84 (2000), movant has failed to make the requisite showing. Accordingly, a COA is DENIED in this case.1 Moreover, because there are no non-frivolous issues to raise on appeal, an appeal would not be taken in good faith. Accordingly, petitioner is not entitled to appeal in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).
ORDER ENTERED.
FootNotes
1. "If the court denies acertificate, [a party] may not appeal the denial but may seek acertificate from the court of appeals under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22. "Rule 11(a) to the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings.
Source: Leagle
