Cutchens v. U.S., CR609-044. (2018)
Court: District Court, S.D. Georgia
Number: infdco20180802901
Visitors: 9
Filed: Jul. 31, 2018
Latest Update: Jul. 31, 2018
Summary: ORDER LISA GODBEY WOOD , District Judge . After a careful, de novo review of the file, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge s Report and Recommendation, to which objections have been filed. Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court. 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
Summary: ORDER LISA GODBEY WOOD , District Judge . After a careful, de novo review of the file, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge s Report and Recommendation, to which objections have been filed. Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court. 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...
More
ORDER
LISA GODBEY WOOD, District Judge.
After a careful, de novo review of the file, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge§s Report and Recommendation, to which objections have been filed. Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court.
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 CCA 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, movant is not entitled to appeal in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) (3).
SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. "If the court denies a certificate, [a party] may not appeal the denial but may seek a certificate from the court of appeals under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22." Rule 11 (a) to the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings.
Source: Leagle
