James v. United States of America

James v. United States of America

Petitioner:	Thomas James, Jr.
Respondent:	United States of America
Case Number:	3:2017cv00872
Filed:	May 22, 2017
Court:	US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee
Office:	Nashville Office
County:	Davidson
Presiding Judge:	Aleta A. Trauger
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
October 3, 2019	Filing 19 MEMORANDUM & ORDER: For the reasons set forth herein, the Motion to Vacate is DENIED. Rule 22 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure provides that an appeal of the denial of a § 2255 motion may not proceed unless a certificate of appealab ility (COA) is issued under 28 U.S.C. § 2253. Rule 11 of the Rules Governing § 2255 Proceedings requires that a district court issue or deny a COA when it enters a final order. Because the court finds that the applicant has not made a su bstantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), the court hereby DENIES a COA. The movant may, however, seek a COA directly from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. Fed. R. App. P. 22(b)(1). This is the final Order in this case. The Clerk shall enter judgment. Fed. R. Civ. P. 58. Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 10/3/2019. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(am)

Date Filed

Document Text

October 3, 2019

Filing 19 MEMORANDUM & ORDER: For the reasons set forth herein, the Motion to Vacate is DENIED. Rule 22 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure provides that an appeal of the denial of a § 2255 motion may not proceed unless a certificate of appealab ility (COA) is issued under 28 U.S.C. § 2253. Rule 11 of the Rules Governing § 2255 Proceedings requires that a district court issue or deny a COA when it enters a final order. Because the court finds that the applicant has not made a su bstantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), the court hereby DENIES a COA. The movant may, however, seek a COA directly from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. Fed. R. App. P. 22(b)(1). This is the final Order in this case. The Clerk shall enter judgment. Fed. R. Civ. P. 58. Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 10/3/2019. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(am)

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 Tennessee Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: James 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: Thomas James, Jr.
Represented By:	Sumter L. Camp, Jr.
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:	Rascoe S. Dean
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?