From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Telemaque v. United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Sep 5, 2019
Case No.: 1:19-cv-22027-UU/REID (S.D. Fla. Sep. 5, 2019)

Opinion

Case No.: 1:19-cv-22027-UU/REID Case No.: 1:15-cr-20531-UU-1

09-05-2019

STEPHEN TELEMAQUE, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.

Copies provided: Stephen Telemaque, pro se


ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This Cause is before the Court upon Petitioner's pro se Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (D.E. 1) (the "Motion").

THE COURT has considered the Motion and is otherwise fully advised in the premises.

This matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Lisette M. Reid, who, on August 8, 2019, issued a Report (the "Report") (D.E. 6) recommending that the Motion be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because Petitioner filed a prior § 2255 motion, which was denied on the merits and is currently pending appeal, and has not obtained permission from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals to file a successive § 2255 motion. D.E. 6 at 5. Thus, the Report states, this Court is without jurisdiction to entertain the instant Motion. Id. Petitioner, who was given fourteen days to file objections to the Report, did not file objections. See LoConte v. Dugger, 847 F.2d 145 (11th Cir. 1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 958 (1988) (holding that failure to file timely objections bars the parties from attacking factual findings on appeal).

Case No. 1:18-cv-23516-UU. Although Petitioner's appeal of his first § 2255 motion is still pending, this Court may properly dismiss the instant § 2255 motion as successive. United States v. Terrell, 141 F. App'x 849, 852 (11th Cir. 2005) (per curiam) (refusing to construe movant's second § 2255 as a motion to amend his initial § 2255 where the district court's denial of his initial § 2255 motion was pending appeal). --------

Upon de novo review, the Court agrees with Magistrate Judge Reid's recommendations and concurs in all her findings. Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Report, D.E. 6, is RATIFIED, ADOPTED, and AFFIRMED. It is further

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion, D.E. 1, is DISMISSED. It is further

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this case is CLOSED.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Miami, Florida this 5th day of September, 2019.

/s/_________

URSULA UNGARO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Copies provided:
Stephen Telemaque, pro se


Summaries of

Telemaque v. United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Sep 5, 2019
Case No.: 1:19-cv-22027-UU/REID (S.D. Fla. Sep. 5, 2019)
Case details for

Telemaque v. United States

Case Details

Full title:STEPHEN TELEMAQUE, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Date published: Sep 5, 2019

Citations

Case No.: 1:19-cv-22027-UU/REID (S.D. Fla. Sep. 5, 2019)

Citing Cases

Telemaque v. Jason

Petitioner then pursued a series of unsuccessful successive applications for collateral relief based largely…

Telemaque v. Barhart

In May 2019 Telemaque filed another § 2255 motion seeking relief under Phifer. The trial court denied that…