Reed v. Jackson

Filing 15

ORDER denying 14 Motion for Certificate of Appealability. Signed by District Judge Avern Cohn. (JOwe)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION MICHAEL B. REED, Petitioner, Case No: 07-10719 HON. AVERN COHN v. ANDREW JACKSON, Respondent. ___________________________/ ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY (Doc. No. 14) This is a habeas case under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner Michael B. Reed ("Petitioner") filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus raising claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and sufficiency of the evidence. The Court denied the petition. See Memorandum and Order Denying Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and Denying Certificate of Appealability, filed March 31, 2010 (Doc. No. 10). Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration which was also denied. See Order filed April 20, 2010 (Doc. No. 13). Before the Court is Petitioner's "Motion for a Certificate of Appealability." Petitioner in particular requests a certificate of appealability on his ineffective assistance of counsel claim based on the allegation that counsel failed to contest the legality of his arrest or move to suppress the weapon which was found at the time of his arrest. The Court has already denied a certificate of appealability. Petitioner's motion is essentially a motion for reconsideration of the denial of a certificate of appealability. Petitioner has failed to demonstrate the Court erred in denying a certificate of appealability. See E.D. Mich. LR 7.1(h)(3). As such, the motion is DENIED. SO ORDERED. S/Avern Cohn AVERN COHN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: June 2, 2010 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to Michael Reed 323335, St. Louis Correctional Facility, 8585 N. Croswell Road, St. Louis, MI 48880 and the attorneys of record on this date, June 2, 2010, by electronic and/or ordinary mail. S/Julie Owens Case Manager, (313) 234-5160 2

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?