From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Duran v. United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE
Mar 5, 2013
CRIMINAL NO. 2:03-CR-113-DBH (D. Me. Mar. 5, 2013)

Opinion

CRIMINAL NO. 2:03-CR-113-DBH CIVIL NO. 2:12-CV-201-DBH

03-05-2013

JOSE DURAN, MOVANT v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA RESPONDENT


ORDER AFFIRMING RECOMMENDED DECISION

OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On January 30, 2013, the United States Magistrate Judge filed with the court, with copies to the parties, her Recommended Decision on 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion. The movant filed his objection to the Recommended Decision on February 15, 2013. I have reviewed and considered the Recommended Decision, together with the entire record; and I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Recommended Decision. I affirm based solely on the statute of limitations and the absence of any basis under the caselaw for equitable tolling. The movant has not met the time limits of 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f).

It is therefore O RDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge is hereby ADOPTED. The movant is denied relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 with prejudice and the motion is D ISMISSED.

Finally, I find that no certificate of appealability shall issue in the event the movant files a notice of appeal because there is no substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c).

SO ORDERED.

___________

D. BROCK HORNBY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Duran v. United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE
Mar 5, 2013
CRIMINAL NO. 2:03-CR-113-DBH (D. Me. Mar. 5, 2013)
Case details for

Duran v. United States

Case Details

Full title:JOSE DURAN, MOVANT v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA RESPONDENT

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE

Date published: Mar 5, 2013

Citations

CRIMINAL NO. 2:03-CR-113-DBH (D. Me. Mar. 5, 2013)