Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Abebe v. U.S., 3:09-cr-00251-MBS. (2019)

Court: District Court, D. South Carolina Number: infdco20190410g66 Visitors: 12
Filed: Apr. 08, 2019
Latest Update: Apr. 08, 2019
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER MARGARET B. SEYMOUR , Senior District Judge . Unula Boo Shawn Abebe ("Movant") is a federal inmate currently housed at USP Lewisburg in Lewisburg, Pennsylvania. On January 25, 2019, Movant, proceeding pro se, filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct a sentence. ECF No. 166. This matter is before the court on a motion for recusal, filed on February 25, 2019. ECF No. 177. Movant alleges that the undersigned has "compulsive disorder" and was remo
More

OPINION AND ORDER

Unula Boo Shawn Abebe ("Movant") is a federal inmate currently housed at USP Lewisburg in Lewisburg, Pennsylvania. On January 25, 2019, Movant, proceeding pro se, filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct a sentence. ECF No. 166. This matter is before the court on a motion for recusal, filed on February 25, 2019. ECF No. 177. Movant alleges that the undersigned has "compulsive disorder" and was removed from a previous case of his. ECF No. 177 at 1.1 Movant further alleges that the undersigned "misused her authority and treated a motion requesting appointment of counsel as a motion for a sentence reduction. . ." Id. at 2. Movant then opines that the undersigned and Senator Lindsey Graham are "obstructionist." Id. at 3.

28 U.S.C. § 455(a) provides that "any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself [or herself] in any proceeding in which his [or her] impartiality might reasonably be questioned." To interpret this language, courts have applied a "reasonable observer" standard. United States v. De Temple, 162 F.3d 279, 287 (4th Cir. 1998). The standard "does not require a judge to recuse himself because of `unsupported, irrational, or highly tenuous speculation.'" Id. (quoting In re United States, 666 F.2d 690, 694 (1st Cir.1981)).

In this case, Movant provides the court with unsupported and speculative allegations about the undersigned's ability to preside over this case. Movant provides the court with no evidence of impartiality. The fact that Movant previously sued the undersigned has no bearing on this case, as "[a] judge is not disqualified merely because a litigant sues or threatens to sue him." United States v. Grismore, 564 F.2d 929, 933 (10th Cir. 1977). Accordingly, Movant's motion for recusal is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. Movant likely refers to Abebe v. Seymour, C/A No. 3:12-cv-00377-JFA, where Movant filed a suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the undersigned.
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