Opinion
Cause No.: 3:98-CR-55(03) RM and Cause No.: 3:02-CV-704 RM.
April 23, 2010
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the court on Robin Peoples' motion for certificate of appealability and motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis. In the past year, Mr. Peoples filed what he styled a Hazel-Atlas motion, after having filed an unsuccessful § 2255 petition in 2002. In his various appeals, Mr. Peoples argued ineffective assistance of counsel three separate times before the appellate court. In the Hazel-Atlas motion, Mr. Peoples turned his accusations to the prosecution, arguing that a massive fraud had been committed on the court because of an alleged error regarding the name of one of the banks he stipulated to robbing before trial. The court construed Mr. Peoples' motion as a repetitive § 2255 petition and denied the petition. Mr. Peoples filed a motion for reconsideration, and the court denied that motion after determining that Mr. Peoples' Hazel-Atlas motion would have no merit.
To obtain a certificate of appealability, Mr. Peoples must make "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003). This means he must show "that reasonable jurists could debate whether (or, for that matter, agree that) the petition should have been resolved in a different manner or that the issues presented were `adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.'" Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. at 336. The court has reviewed the claims made in Mr. Peoples' petitions and has made a general assessment of their merits, see id., and finds that Mr. Peoples is far from meeting his burden.
An appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if it is not taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). Denial of a certificate of appealability doesn't automatically require the denial of a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. Walker v. O'Brien, 216 F.3d 626, 631-32 (7th Cir. 2000). Rather, the court must determine "that a reasonable person could suppose that the appeal has some merit." Id. at 632. For the reasons stated in this opinion and in its opinions denying Mr. Peoples' § 2255 petitions, the court finds that any appeal would not be taken in good faith.
For these reasons, it is ORDERED that the motion for certificate of appealability [Doc. No. 350] and motion to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. No. 351] are DENIED.
SO ORDERED.