Jones v. Sconyeva et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION Signed by Judge William M Acker, Jr on 6/24/14. (SAC )
2014 Jun-24 PM 01:54
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
DANIEL LAMAR JONES,
KENNETH SCONYEVA and THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE
STATE OF ALABAMA,
) Case Number: 2:13-cv-01261-WMA-JHE
On June 6, 2014, the magistrate judge entered a Report and Recommendation, (doc. 11),
recommending that the petition for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed with prejudice. Petitioner
filed objections. (Doc. 12). 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 this 24th day of June, 2014.
WILLIAM M. ACKER, JR.
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?