Opinion
Cause No. 3:04-CV-758 RM, (arising under 3:99-CR-44(01) RM).
August 16, 2006
OPINION AND ORDER
Ricky Swift filed a notice of appeal and moves this court for in forma pauperis status, as well as a certificate of appealability. It appears from Mr. Swift's motion and financial declaration that he has met the requirements set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1915. However, issuance of a certificate of appealability requires the court to find that Mr. Swift has made "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), which he has not. Mr. Swift seeks appellate review of the court's June 7 order denying his Rule 59 motion, which asked this court revisit issues already raised in his first § 2255 petition and address new claims via a new § 2255 petition. As stated in the June 7 order, the court has no jurisdiction to readdress claims from his first § 2255 petition nor address new claims in a new § 2255 petition without an order from the court of appeals authorizing the court to do so. Consequently, the June 7 order cannot serve as the basis for issuing a certificate of appealability.
Mr. Swift's motion for in forma pauperis status is GRANTED [Doc. No. 221], but his request for a certificate of appealability is DENIED [Doc. No. 222].
SO ORDERED.