Pruitt v. Hooks et al
Filing
29
ORDER denying 28 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge J. Randal Hall on 03/13/2015. (thb)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
AUGUSTA DIVISION
*
KENNETH CLARK PRUITT,
*
*
Petitioner,
*
*
v.
CV
114-120
*
*
BRAD HOOKS,
*
*
Respondent.
ORDER
Presently
before
Reconsideration
(Doc.
27)
(Doc.
(Doc.
the
28.)
Court
of
is
Petitioner's
Motion
this Court's February 25,
2 015 Order
25).
On
denying his request to appeal
for
December
23,
2014,
the
Court
petition and closed this case.
Court
determined
because
"an
U.S.C.
§
that
appeal
would
1915(a)(3).
not
denied
(Doc.
Petitioner
be
(Id.)
in forma pauperis
18.)
was
not
taken
(Doc.
25),
reconsideration
of
which
its
the
Petitioner's
entitled
in
good
December
23,
2014
2254
appeal
to
as
Order
under
this
leave
construed
to
faith"
Notwithstanding
Court
§
At the same time, the
Petitioner subsequently filed a motion for
appeal
("IFP")
(Doc.
28
finding,
file
a
IFP
an
IFP
motion
for
27).
As
Petitioner failed to raise any grounds justifying reconsideration
in
his
motion
or
denied the motion.
Now,
for
reconsider his
the
in
his
notice
of
appeal
(Doc.
20),
the
Court
(Id.)
second
right
to
time,
appeal
Petitioner
IFP,
which
asks
is
the
Court
grounded
to
in the
Court's December 23, 2014 finding that there are no non-frivolous
issues to raise on appeal.
He contends that "an appeal would be
taken in good faith" and he is "excused from full compliance with
technical
compliance."
procedural
(Doc.
rules,
28.)
provided
there
Neither argument
is
substantial
is persuasive,
they present any grounds justifying reconsideration of
of
Petitioner's
frivolous
case
issues.
and
the
related
Accordingly,
Reconsideration is DENIED.
(Doc.
right
to
appeal
Petitioner's
nor do
the merits
IFP
non-
Motion
for
28.)
ORDER ENTERED at Augusta, Georgia, this
f 81j> day of March,
2015.
HONO^Zy3pf J. RANp&L HALL
UNITED^STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
§RN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
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?