Humphrey v. United States of America

Filing 19

MEMORANDUM: For the reasons discussed above, the Court concludes that Humphrey is not entitled to relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 based on the claims he asserts in the motion and supplemental motion to vacate. Therefore, the motions will be denied without a hearing. See Engelen v. United States, 68 F.3d 238, 240 (8th Cir. 1995). Additionally, the Court finds that Humphrey has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Therefore, no certificate of appealability will be issued. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253. An order consistent with this Memorandum will be filed separately. Signed by District Judge Carol E. Jackson on 7/24/17. (JAB)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION DERELD HUMPHREY, Movant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) No. 4:15-CV-270 (CEJ) ) ) ) ) ORDER In accordance with the Memorandum filed herewith this date, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion [Doc. # 1] and supplemental motion [Doc. # 9] of Dereld Humphrey to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence are denied. ____________________________ CAROL E. JACKSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated this 24th day of July, 2017.

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?