From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sanders v. United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Apr 17, 2020
CRIMINAL ACTION FILE NO. 1:16-CR-128-MHC-CMS-3 (N.D. Ga. Apr. 17, 2020)

Opinion

CRIMINAL ACTION FILE NO. 1:16-CR-128-MHC-CMS-3 CIVIL ACTION FILE NO. 1:19-CV-1253-MHC-CMS

04-17-2020

MAKISHA RENEE SANDERS, Movant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.


MOTION TO VACATE 28 U.S.C. § 2255

ORDER

Movant Makisha Renee Sanders, acting pro se, has filed a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct an allegedly illegal sentence in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 2255 [Doc. 221] and a motion to amend that motion [Doc. 231]. This matter is before the Court on the Final Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge [Doc. 246] ("R&R") recommending that the motion to vacate and the motion to amend be denied, and that a certificate of appealability not be issued. The Order for Service of the R&R [Doc. 247] provided notice that, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the parties were authorized to file objections within fourteen (14) days of the receipt of that Order. No objections have been filed to the R&R.

Docket references in this Order refer to the docket in Movant's criminal case, No. 1:16-CR-128-MHC-CMS. --------

Absent objection, the district court judge "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge," 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Based upon the absence of objections to the R&R, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the Court has reviewed the R&R for plain error. See United States v. Slay, 714 F.2d 1093, 1095 (11th Cir. 1983). The Court finds no plain error and that the R&R is supported by law.

Accordingly, the Court APPROVES AND ADOPTS the Final Report and Recommendation [Doc. 246] as the judgment of the Court. It is hereby ORDERED that Movant Makisha Renee Sanders's motion to vacate, set aside, or correct an allegedly illegal federal sentence in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 2255 [Doc. 221], and Movant's motion to amend that motion [Doc. 231] are DENIED.

It is further ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is DENIED because Movant has not met the requisite standard. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483-84 (2000). Movant may not appeal the denial of her motion but may seek a certificate from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22. Rule 11(a), Rules Governing § 2255 Proceedings for the United States District Courts.

The Clerk is DIRECTED to close the civil case file.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 17th day of April, 2020.

/s/_________

MARK H. COHEN

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Sanders v. United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Apr 17, 2020
CRIMINAL ACTION FILE NO. 1:16-CR-128-MHC-CMS-3 (N.D. Ga. Apr. 17, 2020)
Case details for

Sanders v. United States

Case Details

Full title:MAKISHA RENEE SANDERS, Movant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

Date published: Apr 17, 2020

Citations

CRIMINAL ACTION FILE NO. 1:16-CR-128-MHC-CMS-3 (N.D. Ga. Apr. 17, 2020)