King v. USA, No. 5:2022cv00317 - Document 2 (E.D. Ky. 2023)

Court Description: JUDGMENT as to Anthony W. King (1): 1. Defendant/Movant Anthony King's motion to vacate, correct, or set aside his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 [Record No. 75 ] is DENIED. His claims are DISMISSED, with prejudice. 2. Judgment is en tered in favor of Plaintiff/Respondent United States of America with respect to all issues raised in this collateral proceeding. 3. This collateral proceeding is DISMISSED and STRICKEN from the docket. 4. A Certificate of Appealability will not issue . 5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to transmit a copy of this Judgment and the corresponding Memorandum Opinion and Order to the movant/defendant. Signed by Judge Danny C. Reeves on 5/8/23. (JLM)cc: COR, and King by US Mail (Main Document 2 replaced on 5/8/2023) (STC).

Download PDF
King v. USA Doc. 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY CENTRAL DIVISION (at Lexington) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff/Respondent, V. ANTHONY W. KING, Defendant/Movant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Criminal Action No. 5: 21-042-DCR and Civil Action No. 5: 22-317-DCR JUDGMENT *** *** *** *** In accordance with the Memorandum Opinion and Order entered this date, and pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows: . 1. Defendant/Movant Anthony King’s motion to vacate, correct, or set aside his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 [Record No. 75] is DENIED. His claims are DISMISSED, with prejudice. 2. Judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiff/Respondent United States of America with respect to all issues raised in this collateral proceeding. 3. This collateral proceeding is DISMISSED and STRICKEN from the docket. 4. A Certificate of Appealability will not issue. 5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to transmit a copy of this Judgment and the corresponding Memorandum Opinion and Order to the movant/defendant. -1- Dockets.Justia.com Dated: May 8, 2023. -2-

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.