Lee v. United States of America

Lee v. United States of America

Petitioner:	James Allen Lee
Respondent:	United States of America
Case Number:	6:2014cv00325
Filed:	February 27, 2014
Court:	US District Court for the Middle District of Florida
Office:	Orlando Office
County:	Orange
Presiding Judge:	Charlene Edwards Honeywell
Presiding Judge:	Karla R. Spaulding
Nature of Suit:	Motions to Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2255
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
November 20, 2015	Filing 9 OPINION AND ORDER: Petitioner's motion to vacate, set aside, or correct an illegal sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 2255 1 is DENIED without prejudice to Petitioner's right to raise his claim in a § 2241 petition. The Cle rk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly and is directed to close this case. The Clerk of Court is directed to file a copy of this Order in criminal case number 6:12-cr-155-Orl-36KRS and to terminate the motion to vacate, set aside, or corr ect an illegal sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 2255 (Criminal Case Doc. No. 85) pending in that case. This Court should grant an application for certificate of appealability only if the Petitioner makes "a substantial showing of the deni al of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. Section 2253(c). Petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Accordingly, a certificate of appealability is DENIED in this case. Signed by Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell on 11/20/2015. (BGS)

Date Filed

Document Text

November 20, 2015

Filing 9 OPINION AND ORDER: Petitioner's motion to vacate, set aside, or correct an illegal sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 2255 1 is DENIED without prejudice to Petitioner's right to raise his claim in a § 2241 petition. The Cle rk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly and is directed to close this case. The Clerk of Court is directed to file a copy of this Order in criminal case number 6:12-cr-155-Orl-36KRS and to terminate the motion to vacate, set aside, or corr ect an illegal sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 2255 (Criminal Case Doc. No. 85) pending in that case. This Court should grant an application for certificate of appealability only if the Petitioner makes "a substantial showing of the deni al of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. Section 2253(c). Petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Accordingly, a certificate of appealability is DENIED in this case. Signed by Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell on 11/20/2015. (BGS)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Florida Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Lee v. United States of America
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: James Allen Lee
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Respondent: United States of America
Represented By:	James D. Mandolfo
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?