Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

DAVID CHARLES SUSSMAN,

Petitioner,

v. 4:20cv414–WS/MAF

SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS,

Respondent.

 

ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Before the court is the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation (ECF

No. 59) docketed July 14, 2022. The magistrate judge recommends that

Petitioner’s post-judgment motions (ECF Nos. 46, 49, 55, and 58) be denied.

Petitioner has filed no objections to the report and recommendation. 

In an earlier report and recommendation (ECF No. 24), the magistrate judge

recommended that Petitioner’s § 2254 petition for writ of habeas corpus be denied.

By order dated November 19, 2021, the undersigned adopted that report and

recommendation and denied Petitioner’s habeas petition. Judgment was entered

Case 4:20-cv-00414-WS-MAF Document 62 Filed 08/29/22 Page 1 of 3
Page 2 of 3

that same day. Petitioner appealed the denial of his petition to the Eleventh Circuit

Court of Appeals, and that appeal is still pending.1

Since filing his notice of appeal, Petitioner has filed in this court a “Motion

for Release on Recognizance While Pending Appeal and Motion to Convert 28

U.S.C. § 2254 Proceeding to a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Proceeding” (ECF No. 46), a

“Motion to Hear & Rule on His Motion for Release on His Own Recognizance”

(ECF No. 49), a “Motion for Default Judgment and Sanctions” (ECF No. 55), and

a “Second Motion to Hear & Rule on ECF No. 46" (ECF No. 58).2

 The magistrate

judge recommends that all four of Petitioner’s post-judgment motions be denied. 

The undersigned has reviewed the record and has determined that the

magistrate judge’s report and recommendation is due to be adopted. Accordingly,

it is ORDERED:

1. The magistrate judge’s report and recommendation (ECF No. 59) is

ADOPTED and incorporated into this order.

2. Petitioner’s “Motion for Release on Recognizance While Pending Appeal

1

 The Florida Department of Corrections’ website indicates that Petitioner

was released on August 26, 2022.

2

 After filing his notice of appeal, Petitioner filed in the Eleventh Circuit (1)

a “Motion for Release on Recognizance and Motion to Convert 28 U.S.C. § 2254

Proceeding to a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Proceeding,” and, later, (2) a “Second Motion for

Release on Own Recognizance.” Both motions were denied without explanation by

the Eleventh Circuit. 

Case 4:20-cv-00414-WS-MAF Document 62 Filed 08/29/22 Page 2 of 3
Page 3 of 3

and Motion to Convert 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Proceeding to a 28 U.S.C. § 2241

Proceeding” (ECF No. 46) is DENIED.

3. Petitioner’s “Motion to Hear & Rule on His Motion for Release on His

Own Recognizance” (ECF No. 49) is DENIED.

4. Petitioner’s “Motion for Default Judgment and Sanctions” (ECF No. 55)

is DENIED.

5. Petitioner’s “Second Motion to Hear & Rule on ECF No. 46" (ECF No.

58) is DENIED.

6. Petitioner’s “Second Motion for Evid. Hearing and to Transport; and,

alternatively, Rule 52(b) Motion to Make Additional Findings” (ECF No. 60) is

DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 27th day of August , 2022.

s/ William Stafford 

WILLIAM STAFFORD

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:20-cv-00414-WS-MAF Document 62 Filed 08/29/22 Page 3 of 3