USVI Public Records

Document text

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. CROIX UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ERROL NELSON, Defendant. ) ) ) ) Case No. 1:10-cr-0012 ) ) ) ) ) ORDER1 BEFORE THE COURT are the following motions filed by Defendant Errol Nelson (“Nelson” or “Defendant”): 1. Defendant’s Motion to Correct Sentence Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, filed on June 24, 2016. (ECF No. 133); 2. Defendant’s pro se Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a person in Federal Custody, filed on July 11, 2016. (ECF No. 137); and 3. Defendant’s pro se Motion to Set Aside or Correct Conviction and Sentence for Lack of Jurisdiction Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, filed on December 5, 2016. (ECF No. 138.) Magistrate George Cannon issued Reports and Recommendations on February 13, 2018, and March 8, 2018, recommending, inter alia, that Nelson’s section 2255 motions be denied. See ECF Nos. 151 and 156. Nelson did not file any objections. The Court conducted a de novo review of the record and has made an independent determination finding no error in the Reports and Recommendations.2 Accordingly, it is hereby 1 Due to the retirement of the judge previously assigned to this case, the undersigned, exercising his authority as Chief Judge of the District Court, reassigned this case to himself on February 17, 2026. 2 See Hill v. Barnacle, 655 Fed. Appx. 142, 148 (3d Cir. 2016) (opining that the district court is not required to make separate findings or conclusions when reviewing a Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation de novo under 28 U.SC. § 636(b)) (citing Elmendorf Grafica, Inc. v. D.S. America, Inc., 48 F.3d 46, 49-50 (1st Cir. 1995) (opining that “[28 U.S.C. § 636(b)] authorizes the district court to adopt in whole as well as in part the proposed findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge. Where, as here, the magistrate judge decided on an undisputed factual record, the district court was certainly not required to rehash the magistrate judge’s reasoning. The role of the magistrate judge is ‘to relieve courts of unnecessary work.’”) (citations omitted). Case: 1:10-cr-00012-RAM-RM Document #: 176 Filed: 03/09/26 Page 1 of 2 United States v. Nelson Case No. 1:10-cr-0012 Order ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Reports and Recommendations, ECF Nos. 151 and 156, are APPROVED and ADOPTED as Orders of this Court as if fully set forth herein; it is further ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Correct Sentence Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, filed on June 24, 2016, ECF No. 133, is DENIED; it is further ORDERED that Defendant’s pro se Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a person in Federal Custody, filed on July 11, 2016, ECF No. 137, DENIED; it is further ORDERED that Defendant’s pro se Motion to Set Aside or Correct Conviction and Sentence for Lack of Jurisdiction Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, filed on December 5, 2016, ECF No. 138, is DENIED; it is further ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is DENIED; it is further ORDERED that a copy of this Order shall be served on Errol Nelson by certified mail return receipt requested and that a copy of the return receipt shall be filed on the docket; and it is further ORDERED that a copy of this Order shall be docketed in the companion civil case of Nelson v. United States, Case No. 1:16-cv-0044 and the Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE that case. Dated: March 9, 2026 /s/ Robert A. Molloy _________ ROBERT A. MOLLOY Chief Judge Case: 1:10-cr-00012-RAM-RM Document #: 176 Filed: 03/09/26 Page 2 of 2