POWELL v. U.S., 1:12CR348-1 (2015)
Court: District Court, E.D. North Carolina
Number: infdco20151118a78
Visitors: 19
Filed: Nov. 17, 2015
Latest Update: Nov. 17, 2015
Summary: ORDER N. CARLTON TILLEY, Jr. , Senior District Judge . The Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge was filed with the Court in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636(b) and, on August 12, 2015, was served on Petitioner. 1 Petitioner filed Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation within the time limits prescribed by 28 U.S.C. 636. (Docs. # 29, 32). The Court has appropriately reviewed the portions of the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation to which objection is made and ha
Summary: ORDER N. CARLTON TILLEY, Jr. , Senior District Judge . The Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge was filed with the Court in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636(b) and, on August 12, 2015, was served on Petitioner. 1 Petitioner filed Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation within the time limits prescribed by 28 U.S.C. 636. (Docs. # 29, 32). The Court has appropriately reviewed the portions of the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation to which objection is made and has..
More
ORDER
N. CARLTON TILLEY, Jr., Senior District Judge.
The Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge was filed with the Court in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and, on August 12, 2015, was served on Petitioner.1 Petitioner filed Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation within the time limits prescribed by 28 U.S.C. § 636. (Docs. # 29, 32).
The Court has appropriately reviewed the portions of the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation to which objection is made and has made a de novo determination in accord with the Magistrate Judge's report. The Court therefore adopts the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Petitioner's Motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence (Doc. # 15); Supplemental Motion to Petitioner's 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Doc. # 23); and Supplemental Motion (Doc. # 24) are DENIED without issuance of a certificate of appealability. A Judgment dismissing this action will be entered contemporaneously with this Order.
FootNotes
1. The Recommendation was initially served on the parties in this action on May 28, 2015, but Petitioner's copy of the Recommendation was returned as undeliverable on June 11, 2015. Thereafter, Petitioner filed a notice of change of address, and the Recommendation was served on Petitioner at his new address.
Source: Leagle
