United States of America v. Myers

Filing 59

MEMORANDUM Order Signed by the Honorable Milton I. Shadur on 11/14/2011:Mailed notice(srn, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
)
)
Respondent, v.
)
)
No. 10 C
ERNEST MYERS #18545-424,
4511 )
(06 CR
Movant.
174-3) ) ) )
)
MEMORANDUM ORDER
In the universe occupied by Ernest Myers (“Myers”), anyone
who disagrees with him must do so out of an anti-Myers bias.
Regrettably that simply reflects Myers’ own biased
perspective--as Alexander Pope wrote exactly four centuries ago
in An Essay on Criticism:
All looks yellow to the jaundic’d eye.
Myers’ jaundiced eye1 has now perceived the need for two new
filings:

a motion to disqualify this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§455(a) and a motion for a more indefinite (sic) statement,
calling on the Bill of Rights and 28 U.S.C. §2106 as authority
for the latter.

As for the first motion, even though it is

totally without merit it is instead denied as moot because
nothing is pending (or impending) before this Court.

And

as for the second motion, it would seem more appropriately to be
directed to the Court of Appeals because the motion complains of
1

This should not be mistaken for a lack of understanding of
the underlying basis for Myers’ point of view. Selfevaluation in
one’s own favor is an understandable human attribute--as far more
ancient philosopher Publilius Syrus wrote in the first century
B.C.:
No one should be judge in his own case.

the July 12, 2011 denial of a Certificate of Appealability in
that Court’s Case No. 11-1596 by “the Jurist”--here is the brief
unpublished order from that court:
Ernest Myers has filed a notice of appeal from the
denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C. §2255, and an
application for a certificate of appealability. This
court has reviewed the final order of the district
court and the record on appeal. We find no substantial
showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See
28 U.S.C. §2253(c)(2).
Accordingly, the request for a certificate of
appealability is DENIED. Myers’s request to proceed in
forma pauperis is DENIED.2
So both of Myers’ current motions are denied--the first on
mootness grounds (although it is substantively without merit as
well) and the second without prejudice to its potential
presentment to the Court of Appeals.

If that Court were to

differ and hold that the second motion is properly within this
Court’s purview, it will of course address the issue.

________________________________________
Milton I. Shadur Senior United States
District Judge
Date:

November 14, 2011

2

[Footnote by this Court] On September 8 the Court of
Appeals issued another unpublished order, this time denying
Myers’ petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc.
2