1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

EASTERN DIVISION 

SONTAY T. SMOTHERMAN, 

 

 Petitioner, Civ. No. 2:14-cv-972 

 Crim. No. 2:12-cr-055(3) 

 v. Judge Frost 

 Magistrate Judge King 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Respondent. 

ORDER 

 This action under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 was dismissed on May 6, 2015 on the basis that the 

claims presented in Petitioner’s Motion to Vacate, ECF No. 270, had been presented to and 

rejected by the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Petitioner’s direct appeal. 

Order, ECF No. 291. See United States v. Smotherman, 564 Fed.Appx. 209 (6th Cir. 2014); see 

also Smotherman v.United States, 134 S.Ct. 2863 (2014). Since that time, Petitioner has filed a 

number of motions seeking reconsideration of that decision; all such motions have been 

considered and denied. This matter is now before the Court on Petitioner’s most recent round of 

requests for reconsideration of the dismissal of this action. Motion for Relief, ECF No. 304; 

Motion for Plain Error Review, ECF No. 305; Motion for Reconsideration, ECF No. 307. This 

matter is also before the Court on Petitioner’s Motion for Certificate of Appealability, ECF No. 

303, Petitioner’s motions for reconsideration of the Court’s denial of a certificate of 

appealability, Motion for Plain Error Review, ECF No. 308, Motion for Reconsideration, ECF 

No. 309, and Motion for Leave to Appeal in Forma Pauperis, ECF No. 306. 

Case: 2:12-cr-00055-GLF-TPK Doc #: 310 Filed: 05/26/15 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
2 

 Petitioner’s Motion for Leave to Appeal in Forma Pauperis, ECF No. 306, is 

GRANTED. All judicial officers who render services in this action shall do so as if the costs 

had been prepaid.1 

 However, the Court previously declined to issue a certificate of appealability. Order, 

ECF No. 299. Petitioner’s Motion for Certificate of Appealability, ECF No. 303, is therefore 

DENIED. Moreover, nothing stated in Petitioner’s motions to reconsider that determination 

persuades the Court that a certificate of appealability should issue. Petitioner’s Motion for Plain 

Error Review, ECF No. 308, and Motion for Reconsideration, ECF No. 309, are therefore 

likewise DENIED. 

 This Court has considered the merits of Petitioner’s Motion to Vacate, ECF No. 270, 

Petitioner’s objections to the Order and Report and Recommendation, Objections, ECF No. 289, 

Amended Objections, ECF No. 292, Objections, ECF No. 294, and Petitioner’s numerous 

requests to reconsider. Nothing stated in Petitioner’s most recent motions seeking 

reconsideration of the dismissal of this action persuades the Court that the dismissal was 

erroneous. Petitioner’s Motion for Relief, ECF No. 304, Motion for Plain Error Review, ECF No. 

305, and Motion for Reconsideration, ECF No. 307, are therefore DENIED. 

 Moreover, the Court will not entertain any additional motions for reconsideration filed by 

Petitioner; any such motions shall be ordered stricken from the record.

 /s/ GREGORY L. FROST 

 GREGORY L. FROST 

 United States District Judge 

 

1 Petitioner is reminded that he must yet file a proper notice of appeal. 

Case: 2:12-cr-00055-GLF-TPK Doc #: 310 Filed: 05/26/15 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>