Glenn v. Danforth

Filing 38

ORDER denying 31 Motion for Reconsideration ; denying 37 Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis. Signed by Judge J. Randal Hall on 10/22/2014. (thb)

IN THE UNITED

STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
AUGUSTA DIVISION

EARLY GLENN,
*

Petitioner,

*
*
*

vs.

CV

113-118

*

WILLIAM DANFORTH,

*

*

Respondent.

*

ORDER

Before

the

Court

reconsideration of
U.S.C.

for

Petitioner's

a certificate of

§ 2253(c)(2)"

leave to appeal

motions

are

(doc. no.

31),

"request

for

appealability under 28
and Petitioner's motion

in forma pauperis

(doc.

no.

37).

Both

are DENIED.

I.

MOTION

FOR RECONSIDERATION

On July 22, 2013, Petitioner sought relief in this Court

under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On August 6, 2014, the Court granted
Respondent's motion to dismiss and denied a certificate of
appealability

(COA).

(Doc.

no.

29.)

Shortly

thereafter,

Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration of the denial of

the COA.

(Doc.

no.

31.)

He argues that the Court should now

grant the COA because he has made a substantial showing of the

denial

of

a

2253(c)(2).

constitutional

right

pursuant

to

28

U.S.C.

§

The issues Petitioner raises in his motion were

addressed and resolved in the

Court's August

6 Order.

His

motion is therefore DENIED.

II.

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL IN FORMA PAUPERIS

In the Court's August 6 Order, the Court held that "there

are

no

would

non-frivolous
not

entitled

be

to

1915(a)(3)."

issues

to

taken

in

good

appeal

in

forma

(Doc.

no.

29.)

raise

faith

on appeal,

and

an appeal

Petitioner

pauperis.

See

On August 27,

28

2014,

is

not

U.S.C.

§

Petitioner

filed in this Court a motion to proceed in forma pauperis.
(Doc.

no.

37.)

"An appeal may not be

taken

in

forma

pauperis

if the

trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good
faith." 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(a)(3).

Upon due consideration,

consistent with this Court's August 6 Order,
that

an

appeal

in

this

matter

would

not

be

and

the Court finds
taken

in

good

faith. Therefore the Court hereby DENIES Defendant's motion to
proceed in forma pauperis.

III.

(Doc.

no.

37.)

CONCLUSION

Accordingly, the Court DENIES Petitioner's "request for
reconsideration" (doc. no. 31), and DENIES Petitioner's motion

to proceed in forma pauperis (doc. no. 37).

ORDER ENTERED at Augusta,
October,

Georgia,

this

^—day of

2014.

Unitedjstates District Judge
Southern District of Georgia