Opinion
4:17-CR-00046-BSM
07-07-2023
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PLAINTIFF v. KRA BROOKS DEFENDANT
ORDER
Kra Brooks's pro se motion for a certificate of appealability [Doc. No. 136] is denied. A certificate of appealability may issue only if the petitioner “has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483-84 (2000). “A substantial showing is a showing that issues are debatable among reasonable jurists, a court could resolve the issues differently, or the issues deserve further proceedings.” Cox v. Norris, 133 F.3d 565, 569 (8th Cir. 1997). As explained in the order denying his motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence [Doc. No. 127], Brooks has not made such a showing. Brooks's request to file a second section 2255 motion is also denied because such a motion must first be certified by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. 28 U.S.C. § 2255(h).
IT IS SO ORDERED.