Opinion
Case No. 8:04-cr-141-T-24MAP, 8:05-cv-1179-T-24MAP.
September 8, 2005
ORDER
The Court denied Defendant's 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate, set aside, or correct an allegedly illegal sentence. Defendant filed a Notice of Appeal. Pursuant to Edwards v. United States, 114 F.3d 1083 (11th Cir. 1997), the Court construes the Notice of Appeal as a request for a certificate of appealability.
To merit a certificate of appealability, Defendant must show that reasonable jurists would find debatable both (1) the merits of an underlying claim, and (2) the procedural issues he seeks to raise. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 475 (2000). Defendant has failed to meet this standard. Therefore, Defendant has failed to satisfy the Slack test.See also, Franklin v. Hightower, 215 F.3d 1196 (11th Cir. 2000).
Accordingly, the Court orders:
That Defendant's construed application for certificate of appealability (Doc. cv-7) is denied.
ORDERED.