Hall v. USA

Filing 20

ORDER: for 15 Report and Recommendations. Finally, for substantially the reasons given in Magistrate Judge Pitman's October 23, 2012, order denying petitioner's request for appointment of counsel, the Court denies petitioner's " ;motion for relief from Judgment of October 23, 2012" dated December 12, 2012. According,the Clerk of the Court is directed to close document number 17 on the docket sheet of this case; to close the "motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. 2255" shown as pending on the docket sheet of Case No. 00 Cr. 103 (JSR) ; and to enter judgment.(Signed by Judge Jed S. Rakoff on 1/23/2013) SO ORDERED. (ama)

Download PDF
0-">._""-0_ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x CARL HALL, Petitioner l;X~(I··~ ( . / 7 1 . v- 10 Civ. 58 \ (JSR) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ORDER Respondent. x JED S. RAKOFF, U.S.D.J. On October 23, 2012 1 the Honorable Henry Pitman, United States Magistrate Judge 1 issued a Report and Recommendation in the above captioned case recommending that the Court deny petitioner Carl Hall's motion to vacate, set aside 1 or correct his sentence in all respects. On the same date, Magistrate Judge Pitman also denied the petitioner s 1 application for appointment of counsel. Objections to the Report and Recommendation were due on November 13 1 2012. By letter postmarked November 8 1 2012 the petitioner requested an extension of time to file his objections. The Court granted the extension on November IS, 2012, and specified that plaintiff's objections would be due forty-five days thereafter. By letter dated December 21, 2012, plaintiff submitted objections to the Report and Recommendacion, and by letter dated December 121 2012, petitioner moved for relief from Magistrate Judge Pitman's order denying him appointment of counsel. Both of these letters will now be docketed. The Court has reviewed the objections to the Report and Recommendation and has reviewed the underlying record novo. Having done so, the Court finds itself in complete agreement with Magistrate Judge Pitman's Report and Recommendation and hereby adopts its reasoning by reference. with prejudice. Accordingly, the Court dismisses the action, In addition, because petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not issue. Moreover, the Court certif be taken in good f 28 U.S.C. 2253. s that any appeal from this Order would not th, as petitioner's claim lacks any arguable basis in law or fact, and therefore permission to proceed is also denied. § 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (a) (3) forma pauperis i Emigrant Savs. Bank (In re Seimon) , 421 F.3d 167, 169 (2d . 2005) Finally, for substantially the reasons given in Magistrate Judge Pitman's October 23, 2012, order denying petitioner's request for appointment of counsel, the Court denies petitioner's "motion for relief from Judgment of October 23, 2012" dated December 12, 2012. According ,the Clerk of the Court is directed to close document number 17 on the docket sheet of this case; to close the "motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. 2255" shown as pending on the docket sheet of Case No. 00 Cr. 103 (JSR) i and to enter judgment. SO ORDERED. Dated: New York, New York January 1t. 2013 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?