SANCHEZ-BADIA
v.
UNITED STATES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that a petition for writ of error coram nobis should be construed as a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and dismissed as an unauthorized successive motion for lack of jurisdiction.
Petitioner filed a Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis. The Magistrate Judge recommended construing it as a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and dismi…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Successive Motions cases and more on FLexlaw
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Report of Magistrate Judge Lisette M. Reid issued July 29, 2020, recommending that the Court construe Guillermo A. Sanchez- Badia’s Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis (D.E. 1) as a Motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence, and to dismiss it as an unauthorized successive 2255 Motion. (“Report,” D.E. 7.) On October 9, 2020, the Court entered an Order providing Petitioner until and including October 30, 2020 to file Objections to the Report. (D.E. 9.) As of the date of this Order, no objections have been filed. Failure to file objections shall bar parties from attacking on appeal the factual findings contained in the report. See Resolution Trust Corp. v. Hallmark Builders, Inc., 996 F. 2d 1144, 1149 (11th Cir. 1993).
Therefore, after an independent review of the Report and record, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that: 1. The Report of the Magistrate Judge (D.E. 7) issued on July 29, 2020, is ADOPTED; 2. Petitioner Guillermo A. Sanchez Badia’s Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis (D.E. 1) is construed as a Motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence, and is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction as an unauthorized successive 2255 Motion; 3. A certificate of appealability SHALL NOT ISSUE; 4. All pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT; and
5. This case is now CLOSED.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida this 2nd day of November, 2020.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Resolution Tr. Corp. v. Hallmark Builders, Inc., 996 F.2d 1144 (11th Cir. 1993)