Butler v. United States of America, No. 3:2009cv00755 - Document 8 (M.D. Tenn. 2009)

Court Description: ORDER: In accordance with the Memorandum entered contemporaneously herewith, (1) Marshall Butler's Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence is hereby DENIED; (2) entry of this Order on the docket shall constit ute entry of final Judgment in accordance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 58 and 79(a); and (3) because Butler cannot demonstrate that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the Court was correct in its rulings, a Certificate of Appealability will not issue. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483-84 (2000). It is so ORDERED. Signed by Senior Judge Robert Echols on 11/25/09. (af)

Download PDF
Butler v. United States of America Doc. 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION MARSHALL BUTLER, Movant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 3:09-0755 (Criminal Case No. 3:07-00136-01) JUDGE ECHOLS ORDER In accordance with the Memorandum entered contemporaneously herewith, (1) Marshall Butler’s Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence is hereby DENIED; (2) entry of this Order on the docket shall constitute entry of final Judgment in accordance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 58 and 79(a); and (3) because Butler cannot demonstrate that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the Court was correct in its rulings, a Certificate of Appealability will not issue. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483-84 (2000). It is so ORDERED. _________________________________________ ROBERT L. ECHOLS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dockets.Justia.com

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.