Valez-Santos v. Rivera
ORDER adopting 11 Recommendation and overruling Valez-Santo's objections, 18 . Valez-Santos cannot proceed under § 2255's savings clause because he has not shown the § 2255 remedy to be inadequate or ineffective. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 12/19/2014. (jak)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
MELVIN OMAR V ALEZ-SANTOS
C. V. RIVERA, Warden, Federal Correctional
Complex, Forrest City, Low
On de novo review, the Court adopts the recommendation, NQ 11, and
overrules Valez-Santos's objections, NQ 18. FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3). ValezSantos cannot proceed under § 2255's savings clause because he has not
shown the §
remedy to be inadequate or ineffective. Lopez-Lopez v.
Sanders, 590 F.3d 905, 907 (8th Cir. 2010).
No defect, jurisdictional or
procedural, exists regarding the designation of Magistrate Judge Deere in this
case. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b); Local Rule 72.1; NQ 1, stamp notation of random
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?