From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Peterson

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION AT COLUMBUS
Feb 28, 2020
Case No. 2:17-cr-093 (S.D. Ohio Feb. 28, 2020)

Opinion

Case No. 2:17-cr-093 Also 2:19-cv-3086

02-28-2020

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JAMAIL ADAMU PETERSON, Defendant.



Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz

OPINION AND ORDER

This case is before the Court on Defendant's Motion to Vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (ECF No. 32). The Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendations on January 28, 2020, recommending that the Motion be dismissed with prejudice (ECF No. 36). In the Report Defendant was advised that he had seventeen days or until February 14, 2020, to file any objections, but he has not done so.

Accordingly, the Report is adopted and the Motion to Vacate is dismissed with prejudice. Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 58, the Clerk will enter a separate judgment to that effect. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitioner is denied a certificate of appealability and the Court certifies to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. February 28, 2020.

/s/_________

Algenon L. Marbley, Chief Judge


Summaries of

United States v. Peterson

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION AT COLUMBUS
Feb 28, 2020
Case No. 2:17-cr-093 (S.D. Ohio Feb. 28, 2020)
Case details for

United States v. Peterson

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JAMAIL ADAMU PETERSON, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION AT COLUMBUS

Date published: Feb 28, 2020

Citations

Case No. 2:17-cr-093 (S.D. Ohio Feb. 28, 2020)

Citing Cases

Goldsberry v. United States

Second, even if Rehaif applied to guilty pleas, Rehaif is inapplicable because it did not announce a new rule…