Hill v. United States of America
ORDER: For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, the Motion To Vacate (Doc. No. 1 ) is DENIED, and this action is DISMISSED. This Order shall constitute the judgment in this case pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 58. Signed by Chief Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw, Jr on 11/30/2017. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(ab)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
PATRICK WADE HILL,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
CHIEF JUDGE CRENSHAW
Pending before the Court are the Petitioner’s Motion To Vacate, Set Aside, Or Correct
Sentence In Accordance With 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Doc. No. 1); the Government’s Response (Doc.
No. 5); the Government’s Supplemental Brief (Doc. No. 8); the Petitioner’s Reply (Doc. No. 10);
and the Petitioner’s Supplemental Pleading (Doc. No. 11). For the reasons set forth in the
accompanying Memorandum Opinion, the Motion To Vacate (Doc. No. 1) is DENIED, and this
action is DISMISSED.
This Order shall constitute the judgment in this case pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 58.
Should the Petitioner give timely notice of an appeal from this Order, and the
accompanying Memorandum Opinion, such notice shall be treated as an application for a
certificate of appealability, 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c), which will not issue because the Petitioner has
failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Castro v. United
States, 310 F.3d 900 (6th Cir. 2002).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
WAVERLY D. CRENSHAW, JR.
Chief United States District Judge
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?