Leflore v. United States of America (INMATE 3)

Filing 88

ORDER: it is ORDERED as follows: (1) Petitioner's objection (Doc. # 87 ) is OVERRULED; (2) The Recommendation (Doc. # 86 ) is ADOPTED; (3) The motion (Doc. # 75 ) is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction; and (4) This case remains closed. Signed by Honorable Judge William Keith Watkins on 03/07/2023. (tha, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
TONY JAMES LEFLORE,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent.

CASE NO. 2:17-CV-393-WKW
[WO]

ORDER
On February 8, 2023, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation (Doc.
# 86) to which Petitioner filed an objection (Doc. # 87). The objection does not call
into question the Recommendation’s proposed finding that Petitioner’s Rule 60(b)
motion is a disguised, successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, which he filed without
the required appellate court authorization. Based upon a de novo review of the
record, it is ORDERED as follows:
(1)

Petitioner’s objection (Doc. # 87) is OVERRULED;

(2)

The Recommendation (Doc. # 86) is ADOPTED;

(3)

The motion (Doc. # 75) is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of

subject matter jurisdiction; and
(4)

This case remains closed.

Final judgment will be entered separately. Petitioner is not required to obtain
a certificate of appealability to appeal the final judgment, should he desire to do so,
because it is not “‘a final order in a habeas corpus proceeding’” within the meaning
of 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c).

Hubbard v. Campbell, 379 F.3d 1245, 1247 (11th Cir.

2004) (quoting § 2253(c)).
DONE this 7th day of March, 2023.
/s/ W. Keith Watkins
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2