Collins v. United States Of America

Filing 8

ORDER adopting 4 Report and Recommendations; denying as moot 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; dismissing the instant motion filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Court denies a COA in this case, and closes this civil action. Signed by Judge J. Randal Hall on 07/31/2014. (thb) Modified on 7/31/2014 (thb).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
AUGUSTA DIVISION

LATERRIO DEANDRE COLLINS,
Petitioner,
CV 114-096

v.

(Formerly CR 112-177)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent.

ORDER

After a careful, de novo review of the file, the Court concurs with the Magistrate

Judge's Report and Recommendation ("R&R"), to which no objections have been filed.
In lieu of objections, Petitioner submitted a motion for an extension to file objections to
the R&R and a motion to amend his petition to add two additional claims. (Doc. no. 6.)
On July 3, 2014, the Magistrate Judge ordered Petitioner to either submit an amended

petition or proceed with his original petition by submitting objections to the R&R within

fourteen days. (Doc. no. 7.) The Magistrate Judge warned Petitioner if he filed neither
an amended petition nor objections within the fourteen-day extension, the original R&R
would be submitted to the undersigned, without objections. (Id.) Petitioner has not

submitted nor explained his failure to submit an amended petition or objections.
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the R&R of the Magistrate Judge as its opinion,

DENIES as MOOT Petitioner's motion to proceed informa pauperis, (doc. no. 2), and
DISMISSES the instant motion filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.

Further, a federal prisoner must obtain a certificate of appealability ("COA")

before appealing the denial of his motion to vacate. This Court "must issue or deny a

certificate of appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the applicant." Rule
11(a) to the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings. This Court should grant a COA
only if the prisoner makes a "substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right."
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). For the reasons set forth in the R&R, and in consideration of the

standards enunciated in Slack v. McDaniel. 529 U.S. 473, 482-84 (2000), Petitioner has

failed to make the requisite showing. Accordingly, the Court DENIES a COA in this

case.1 Moreover, because there are no non-frivolous issues to raise on appeal, an appeal
would not be taken in good faith. Accordingly, Petitioner is not entitled to appeal in

forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).

Upon the foregoing, the Court CLOSEJ5 this civil action

SO ORDERED this^_ day of^—if/^A ,2014, at Augusta, Georgia.

HONORABLE J. RANDAL HALL

UNITED SjTATES DISTRICT JUDGE
IQUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

1 the court denies a certificate, a party may not appeal the denial but may seek a
"If
certificate from the court of appeals under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22."
Rule 11(a) to the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings.