Washington v. United States of America

Filing 38

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. (see order for details) IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner's motion for an extension of time [#37-1, #37-2] is denied in part and denied as moot in part as set out above. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner's motion for appointment of counsel [#37-3] is denied. Signed by District Judge Catherine D. Perry on 03/31/2014. (CBL)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
BURL WASHINGTON,
Petitioner,
vs.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 4:11 CV 183 CDP

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before me on petitioner’s motion for an extension of time to
file a motion for reconsideration and a certificate of appealability. Petitioner
apparently intends to ask me to reconsider my March 11, 2014 denial of his § 2255
motion. I will therefore construe petitioner’s motion liberally as one for additional
time to file a motion to alter or amend the Judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e).
Petitioner’s motion for an extension of time must be denied because Rule 6(b)(2)
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that “[a] court must not extend
the time to act under . . . Rule 59(e).” I have already denied petitioner a certificate
of appealability, so the motion for an extension of time to ask me for one is denied
as moot. Finally, petitioner requests appointment of counsel due to blindness.
Because I have denied a certificate of appealability, I do not believe that
appointment of counsel is warranted.

Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for an extension of
time [#37-1, #37-2] is denied in part and denied as moot in part as set out above.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for appointment of
counsel [#37-3] is denied.

CATHERINE D. PERRY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 31st day of March, 2014.

-2-