Williamson v. Marquis

Filing 55

Order Williamson is not entitled to relief from judgment. His motion reiterates some of the arguments I previously rejected, and which also were rejected by the Sixth Circuit. I deny his motion for relief from judgment. (Doc. No. 52). Further, I certify there is no basis on which to issue a certificate of appealability. (Related Doc # 52 ). Judge Jeffrey J. Helmick on 5/17/2021.(S,AL)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
Michael Williamson,

Case No. 1:18-cv-472
Petitioner,

v.

ORDER

Harold May, Warden,
Respondent.
On February 26, 2021, Petitioner Michael Williamson filed a motion for relief from
judgment from my January 7, 2020 Memorandum Opinion and Order overruling his objections,
adopting the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Kathleen B. Burke, and denying in
part and dismissing in part his grounds for relief stated in his petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
(Doc. No. 52).
Williamson previously appealed my decision to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, which
concluded Williamson failed to state a colorable claim for relief and denied his application for a
certificate of appealability. (Doc. No. 49). Williamson appealed this decision to the Supreme Court
of the United States, which declined to issue a writ of certiorari. (Doc. No. 51).
Williamsons claims I denied his petition for a writ of habeas corpus through “mistake and
inadvertence,” and that I failed to recognize the state-court prosecutor committed a fraud on the
court. (Doc. No. 52 at 2-5). He also contends his sentence in effect is one for life without parole,
which was an improper “trial tax.” (Id. at 5).

Williamson is not entitled to relief from judgment. His motion reiterates some of the
arguments I previously rejected, and which also were rejected by the Sixth Circuit. (See Doc. Nos.
41 and 49). A movant may not obtain relief under Rule 60(b) by repeating the same, unsuccessful
arguments. See, e.g., Kersh v. Macomb St. Clair Employment Training Agency, 55 F. App’x 723, 724-25 (6th
Cir. 2003). Therefore, I deny his motion for relief from judgment. (Doc. No. 52).
Further, I certify there is no basis on which to issue a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. §
2253; Fed. R. App. P. 22(b).
So Ordered.
s/ Jeffrey J. Helmick
United States District Judge

2