Burton v. United States of America
||January 6, 2006
||US District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia
||David A. Faber
||R. Clarke VanDervort
|Nature of Suit:
||Prisoner: Vacate Sentence
|Cause of Action:
||28:2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
|Jury Demanded By:
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|March 2, 2009
JUDGMENT ORDER. Consistent with the Memorandum Opinion and Order filed this day, the Court DENIES 56 Plaintiff's Motion to Vacate (2255) and 65 Plaintiff's Motion to Amend 2255 Motion; DISMISSES the case and directs the Clerk to remove this case from the Court's active docket. Signed by Senior Judge David A. Faber on 3/2/2009. (certified cc: Plaintiff, Pro Se and counsel of record) (arb) Modified on 3/3/2009 to remove reference to adoption of the proposed findings and recommendations. (jkk).
|February 5, 2009
SUPPLEMENTAL PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION of Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort RECOMMENDING the District Court DENY [56 & 65] Movant's MOTION to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody pursuant to Title 2 8, United States Code, Section 2255 as amended to the extent that Movant's Motion is based upon his claim that his trial attorney, Michael L. Desautels, was ineffective in representing him in failing to take an appeal of his conviction and sentence, DISMISS this matter and remove it from the District Court's docket. Objections to Proposed F&R due by 2/23/2009. Signed by Magistrate Judge R. Clarke VanDervort on 2/5/2009. (cc: Movant, Pro Se and counsel of record) (arb)
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 West Virginia Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?