IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
October 10, 2012
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RESPONDENT,
HARVEY SEWELL, MOVANT.
Movant, a federal prisoner proceeding without counsel, has filed a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. On September 14, 2012, the undersigned issued an order denying movant's request for appointment of counsel. Dckt. No. 260. On October 1, 2012, movant filed a Motion for Reconsideration, requesting that the court reconsider his request for appointment of counsel. Dckt. No. 261.
Local Rule 230(j) requires that a motion for reconsideration state "what new or different facts or circumstances are claimed to exist which did not exist or were not shown upon such prior motion, or what other grounds exist for the motion," and "why the facts or circumstances were not shown at the time of the prior motion." E.D. Cal., Local Rule 230(j)(3)-(4). Movant fails to demonstrate circumstances demonstrating that the order warrants reconsideration and simply rehashes arguments previously made by his former counsel.
Nonetheless, the undersigned has considered the merits of movant's arguments, and for the reasons stated in the court's September 14, 2012 order, movant's motion for reconsideration (Dckt. No. 261) is denied.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.