Hopkins v. United States Of America

Filing 3

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS dismissing 1 Motion to Vacate/Set Aside/Correct Sentence (2255) filed by Vernon Edward Hopkins. Objections to R&R due by 10/3/2016. Signed by Magistrate Judge G. R. Smith on 9/19/16. (jlm)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
SAVANNAH DIVISION
VERNON EDWARD HOPKINS,
Movant,
v.

Case No. CV416-133
CR400-128

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
In Hopkins v. United States , CV416-024, Vernon Edward Hopkins
invoked 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to seek resentencing absent an armed career
criminal enhancement. CR400-128, doc. 61 at 1. This Court dismissed it
as successive. Id. at 3, adopted, doc. 67. He then applied to the Eleventh
Circuit for permission to file a successive § 2255 motion. Doc. 69 (copy of
that successiveness application erroneously docketed as a motion before
this Court and thus, ADMINISTRATIVELY DENIED ). That court
denied his application on the merits.

In Re Hopkins , No. 16-13139-J

(11th Cir. June 29, 2016) (copy attached). Hopkins filed what he called
an “Authorized Second and Successive Motion To Vacate [Etc.]” here.

Doc. 68. It most certainly was not authorized and therefore must be

DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.
Applying the Certificate of Appealability (COA) standards set forth
in Brown v. United States , 2009 WL 307872 at * 1-2 (S.D. Ga. Feb. 9,
2009), the Court discerns no COA-worthy issues at this stage of the
litigation, so no COA should issue either. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1); Rule
11(a) of the Rules Governing Habeas Corpus Cases Under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2255 (“The district court must issue or deny a certificate of
appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the applicant.”)
(emphasis added). Any motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis
therefore is moot.

SO REPORTED AND RECOMMENDED this 19th day of
September, 2016.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

2