Isaacs v. United States of America

Filing 23

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 7/3/2014. (AVC)

FILED
2014 Jul-03 PM 01:23
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
MIDDLE DIVISION
JOHN C. ISAACS,
Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 4:10-cv-8042-VEH-JEO
4:06-cr-0363-VEH-JEO

Respondent.

MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case is before the court on the magistrate judge’s Report and
Recommendation. (Doc. 22). While objections to the Report and Recommendation
were due by June 23, 2014, none have been filed.
The court has considered the entire file in this action together with the
Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation and has reached an independent
conclusion that the Report and Recommendation is due to be adopted and
approved. The court hereby ADOPTS and APPROVES the findings and
recommendation of the magistrate judge as the findings and conclusions of the
court. In accordance with the recommendation, Petitioner’s § 2255 motion is due to
be dismissed.

DENIAL OF CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY
Pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing 2255 Proceedings, the court
finds that a certificate of appealability in this case is not well-founded, and any
application for one is due to be denied. 28 U.S.C. foll. 2255, Rule 11(a) (“The
district court must issue or deny a certificate of appealability when it enters a final
order adverse to the applicant.”). The habeas corpus statute makes clear that an
applicant is entitled to appeal a district court's denial of his habeas corpus petition
only where a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.
2253(c)(1). A certificate of appealability may issue only where “the applicant has
made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.
2243(c)(2). This court certifies that any appeal from this determination would be
frivolous and not brought in good faith; therefore, Petitioner may not take an
appeal in forma pauperis, nor will he be granted a certificate of appealability in
connection with same.
CONCLUSION
The instant Motion is dismissed as time-barred pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
2255(f). Further, the Motion is denied on its merits. Petitioner is not entitled to a
certificate of appealability and, therefore, he is not entitled to appeal in forma
pauperis. A separate order will be entered.
2

DONE this the 3rd day of July, 2014.

VIRGINIA EMERSON HOPKINS
United States District Judge

3