Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Davis

United States District Court, D. Vermont

March 11, 2015

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
JAMES W. DAVIS

ORDER

J. GARVAN MURTHA, District Judge.

The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation was filed February 9, 2015. (Doc. 55.) After de novo review and absent objection, the Report and Recommendation is AFFIRMED, APPROVED and ADOPTED. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). James W. Davis's motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Doc. 39) is DENIED. The claims are barred by the one-year statute of limitations set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f), and equitable tolling is not warranted.

Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 22(b), the Court DENIES petitioner a certificate of appealability ("COA") because the petitioner failed to make a substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). In addition, because the petition is dismissed on procedural grounds, the petitioner cannot be issued a COA due to his failure to demonstrate that "jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling." See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see also Gonzalez v. Thaler, 132 S.Ct. 641, 648 (2012) (citing Slack).

It is further certified that any appeal taken in forma pauperis from this Order would not be taken in good faith because such an appeal would ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.