Corpus: 543,223 opinions · 3,177 judges · newest 2026-06-23 · expanding Coverage ↗
Opinion

govinfo:USCOURTS-ncmd-6_92-cr-00184-2

U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina · 2012-03-06

· GavelSight synced 2026-09-06 03:35:05

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
EDWARD DANE JEFFUS, )
)
Petitioner, )
) 1:11CV326
v. ) 6:92CR184-2
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Respondent. )
ORDER
The Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge was filed
with the court in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and, on June 2, 2011,
was served on the parties in this action.  Petitioner objected to the
Recommendation.
The court has appropriately reviewed the portions of the Magistrate
Judge’s report to which objection was made and has made a de novo
determination which is in accord with the Magistrate Judge’s report.  The court
therefore adopts the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Petitioner’s “Motion for Relief from
Judgment and Specific Performance/Enforcement of Plea Agreement and/or
Independent Action in Equity” [Docket No. 206] and “Complaint for
Case 6:92-cr-00184-WO     Document 234     Filed 03/06/12     Page 1 of 2
-2-
Independent Action in Equity” [Docket No. 218] are construed partially as
motions under § 2255 and partially as motions under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60 and/or
independent actions and that the § 2255 portions of the motions are  dismissed
for failure to obtain certification for this § 2255 application by filing a Motion
for Authorization in the court of appeals as required by 28 U.S.C. §§ 2255 and
Fourth Circuit Local Rule 22(d), and that the other portions of the
motions/independent actions are DENIED.  IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that
Petitioner’s “Motion for Summary Judgment” [Docket No. 210] and “Motion for
a Ruling on Motion to Suppress and/or Review on the Issue Preserved” [Docket
No. 214] are DENIED.  Finding no substantial issue for appeal concerning the
denial of a constitutional right affecting the conviction, nor a debatable
procedural ruling, a certificate of appealability is not issued.  A Judgment
dismissing this action will be entered contemporaneously with this Order.
This the 6
th  day of March, 2012
/s/ N. Carlton Tilley, Jr.                 
Senior United States District Judge
Case 6:92-cr-00184-WO     Document 234     Filed 03/06/12     Page 2 of 2

Passage view · GavelSight