Opinion
04-cv-02206-CM-GAY
06-06-2022
MICHAEL E. KEELING, Petitioner v. Shannon Respondents,
PETITION FOR RECUSAL OF MAGISTRATE AND DISTRICT COURT JUDGE'S AND RECONSIDERATION OF PREVIOUS ORDER'S PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. SECTTON 455 (A)(B)(1)
And Now Comes, Michael E, Reeling, pro-se. in the above caption matter hereby respectfully seeks a Recusal of His Magistrate And District Court Judge's Pursuant To Rule 28 U.S.C. Sec, 455 (a)(b)(1) and or Reconsideration Of Their Previous, Order's...
(T)he following claims support a prima facie showing of all the relevant facts that harbors doubt's about the Judge's own 'impartiality stemming directly after the erroneous creation of non-produced physical evidence at Petitioner's State Trial and the total ignoring of this' mistake' during a certified objection, to the Magistrate's Report And Recommendation" and the improper raising of the State /Federal Bar for granting a Petitions for Nunc Pro Tunc Status of a timely filed Notice Of Appeal herein, etc etc...
While, it also appears the Jurist have given little if any consideration to the extremely heavy burden for satisfying the Antiterrorism And Effective Death Penalty Act (A.E.D.P.A) for being granted a Second or Successive Habeas Corpus, 28 U.S.C. 2244(b) in the case at Bar with a clear prima facie showing false/creation of manufactured evidence not produced a petitioner 's State Trial, that without such a mistake petitioner would have established a prosecutional Brady violation of one whom properly raised a actual innocent claim in the State/Federal Jurisdiction herein, .., . 1