Opinion
1:18-cr-193-1 1:20-cv-539
07-31-2023
RODERICK LAMAR SANFORD, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.
ORDER
The Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge was filed with the court in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), (Doc. 193), and, on June 27, 2023, was served on the parties in this action (see Doc. 194). Petitioner filed Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation. (Doc. 195.)
This court is required to “make a de novo determination of those portions of the [Magistrate Judge's] report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). This court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the [M]agistrate [J]udge....[O]r recommit the matter to the [M]agistrate [J]udge with instructions.” Id.
The court has appropriately reviewed the portions of the Recommendation to which objection was made and has made a de novo determination in accord with the Recommendation. The court therefore adopts the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation, (Doc. 193), is ADOPTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner's Motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence, (Doc. 163), and Amended Motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence, (Doc. 167), are DENIED.
Finding neither a substantial issue for appeal concerning the denial of a constitutional right affecting the conviction nor a debatable procedural ruling, a certificate of appealability is DENIED.
A Judgment dismissing this action will be entered contemporaneously with this Order.