Stanton v. United States Of America

Filing 53

ORDER denying 51 Motion for Certificate of Appealability; denying as moot 52 Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis. Signed by Chief Judge J. Randal Hall on 09/17/2018. (thb)

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
STATESBORO DIVISION

TERRANCE GERARD STANTON,

*
*

Petitioner,

*
*

V.

*

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

CV 615-064

*

(Formerly CR 612-018

*
*

Respondent.

*

ORDER

On April 17, 2017, this Court dismissed Petitioner's
motion brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.

On August 3,

2018, this Court denied Petitioner's motion to reconsider the

Order of April 17, 2017 under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
60(b)(2).

(Doc. 47.)

Petitioner's

In fact, the Court had earlier denied

motion for

reconsideration

which was based on the same grounds.

under

Rule

59(e),

(Doc. 40.)

At present. Petitioner has appealed from this Court's
Order of August 3, 2018, denying his Rule 60(b)(2) motion.
seeks a Certificate of Appealability.

He

The Court has now

reviewed Petitioner's so-called "new evidence" of ineffective
assistance of counsel on two occasions and twice determined

that he suffered no prejudice thereby.^

^

(See Docs. 40 & 47.)

In fact, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals denied

Petitioner's motion for a Certificate of Appealability from
this Court's initial denial of his § 2255 motion, which

In reviewing his claim once again, the Court finds that
Petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing of the

denial of a constitutional right.

His motion for the issuance

of a Certificate of Appealability (doc. 51) is therefore
DENIED.

See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B).

Consequently, his

motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal (doc. 52) is
DENIED AS MOOT.

ORDER ENTERED at Augusta, Georgia, this

day of

September, 2018.

IlEF JUDGE
UNIT

STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

included the same ineffective assistance of counsel claim.

(Doc. 41.)

The Eleventh Circuit then denied Petitioner's
motion for reconsideration, and the United States Supreme
Court denied his petition for writ of certiorari. (Docs. 42 &

43.)
2