United States District Court, S.D. Georgia, Augusta Division
October 22, 2014
EARLY GLENN, Petitioner,
WILLIAM DANFORTH, Respondent.
J. RANDAL HALL, District Judge.
Before the Court are Petitioner's "request for reconsideration of a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2)" (doc. no. 31), and Petitioner's motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis (doc. no. 37. Both motions are DENIED.
I. MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
On July 22, 2013, Petitioner sought relief in this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On August 6, 2014, the Court granted Respondent's motion to dismiss and denied a certificate of appealability (COA). (Doc. no. 29.) Shortly thereafter, Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration of the denial of the COA. (Doc. no. 31.) He argues that the Court should now grant the COA because he has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). The issues Petitioner raises in his motion were addressed and resolved in the Court's August 6 Order. His motion is therefore DENIED.
II. MOTION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL IN FORMA PAUPERIS
In the Court's August 6 Order, the Court held that "there are no non-frivolous issues to raise on appeal, an appeal would not be taken in good faith and Petitioner is not entitled to appeal in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3)." (Doc. no. 29.) On August 27, 2014, Petitioner filed in this Court a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. no. 37.)
"An appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). Upon due consideration, and consistent with this Court's August 6 Order, the Court finds that an appeal in this matter would not be taken in good faith. Therefore the Court hereby DENIES Defendant's motion to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. no. 37.)
Accordingly, the Court DENIES Petitioner's "request for reconsideration" (doc. no. 31), and DENIES Petitioner's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (doc. no. 37.)