U.S. v. MOORE, 09-00279-11. (2016)
Court: District Court, W.D. Louisiana
Number: infdco20161006e92
Visitors: 8
Filed: Oct. 05, 2016
Latest Update: Oct. 05, 2016
Summary: ORDER S. MAURICE HICKS, Jr. , District Judge . Before the Court is a Motion for Reconsideration (Record Document 796) filed by Carlos B. Moore ("Moore"). Moore asks the Court to reconsider its May 12, 2016 Order (Record Document 791). At this time, both Moore's Section 2255 motion (Record Document 628) and his Motion to Reduce Sentence (Record Document 717) remain pending and rulings will issue in due course. This Court fully intends to resolve all claims for relief raised in Moore's Sectio
Summary: ORDER S. MAURICE HICKS, Jr. , District Judge . Before the Court is a Motion for Reconsideration (Record Document 796) filed by Carlos B. Moore ("Moore"). Moore asks the Court to reconsider its May 12, 2016 Order (Record Document 791). At this time, both Moore's Section 2255 motion (Record Document 628) and his Motion to Reduce Sentence (Record Document 717) remain pending and rulings will issue in due course. This Court fully intends to resolve all claims for relief raised in Moore's Section..
More
ORDER
S. MAURICE HICKS, Jr., District Judge.
Before the Court is a Motion for Reconsideration (Record Document 796) filed by Carlos B. Moore ("Moore"). Moore asks the Court to reconsider its May 12, 2016 Order (Record Document 791). At this time, both Moore's Section 2255 motion (Record Document 628) and his Motion to Reduce Sentence (Record Document 717) remain pending and rulings will issue in due course. This Court fully intends to resolve all claims for relief raised in Moore's Section 2255 motion. See Clisby v. Jones, 960 F.2d 925, 936 (11th Cir. 1992) (holding district courts must resolve all claims for relief raised in a petition for writ of habeas corpus, regardless whether habeas relief is granted or denied). The "Request for Remedial Relief" motion recently denied by this Court was not construed as a habeas motion. See Record Documents 790 & 791. Moore has not shown that reconsideration is warranted in this instance.
Accordingly, based on the showing made in his motion, Moore's Motion for Reconsideration (Record Document 796) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
