Ball v. Jones et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 8/2/2016. (AVC)
2016 Aug-02 PM 02:43
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
GLENN EDWARD BALL,
WARDEN CARLA JONES
and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
OF THE STATE OF ALABAMA,
Civil Action No.: 1:13-cv-01725-RDP-JHE
On June 7, 2016, the Magistrate Judge entered a Report and Recommendation,
recommending that the petition for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed with prejudice. (Doc. 12).
Petitioner Glenn Edward Ball sought and received an extension of time to file objections, but no
objections have been filed. (Docs. 13 and 14). The court has considered the entire file in this
action, together with the Report and Recommendation, and has reached an independent
conclusion that the Report and Recommendation is due to be adopted and approved.
Accordingly, the court hereby ADOPTS and APPROVES the findings and
recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as the findings and conclusions of this court. The
petition for writ of habeas corpus is due to be dismissed. A separate Order will be entered.
This court may issue a certificate of appealability “only if the applicant has a made a
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2). To make such
a showing, a “petitioner must demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court’s
assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong,” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,
484 (2000), or that “the issues presented were adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed
further.” Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003) (internal quotations omitted). This
court finds Petitioner’s claims do not satisfy either standard.
DONE and ORDERED this August 2, 2016.
R. DAVID PROCTOR
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?