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

govinfo:USCOURTS-ncmd-6_92-cr-00184-7

U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina · 2015-01-15

· 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, )
)
v. ) 1:13CV446
) 6:92CR184-2
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Respondent. )
ORDER
On October 29, 2013, December 16, 2013, and on November 14, 2014,
Recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge were filed and notice
was served on the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636.  Petitioner filed
objections [Docs. #271, 277, 285] to the Recommendations within the time
limit prescribed by Section 636.  The Court has reviewed Petitioner’s objections
de novo and finds they do not change the substance of the United States
Magistrate Judge’s Recommendations [Docs. #265, 273, 283], which are
affirmed and adopted.  Petitioner also filed objections [Doc. #280] to an Order
of the Magistrate Judge denying his request for a hearing.  The Court has
reviewed the objections and concludes that the Order is not clearly erroneous
or contrary to law.  Therefore, those objections are also overruled.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Petitioner’s § 2255 Motion [Doc. #260],
as amended, is filed and then DISMISSED sua sponte for failure to obtain
Case 6:92-cr-00184-WO     Document 287     Filed 01/15/15     Page 1 of 2
certification for his § 2255 application by filing a Motion for Authorization in the
Court of Appeals as required by 28 U.S.C. §§ 2255 and 2244 and Fourth
Circuit Local Rule 22(d).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for Relief from
Judgment [Doc. #262] under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), Motion for
Release on Bail [Doc. #264], Motion to for Relief from Judgment [Doc. #270]
under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(4), Motions to Amend [Docs. #272, 282], Motion
for Hearing [Doc. #278], and Renewed Motion for Release on Bail [Doc. #281]
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 DENIED. 
This the 15  of January, 2015.th
  /s/ N. Carlton Tilley, Jr.
       Senior United States District Judge
2
Case 6:92-cr-00184-WO     Document 287     Filed 01/15/15     Page 2 of 2

Passage view · GavelSight