Martinez v. Gordy et al
Filing
5
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge L Scott Coogler on 9/12/2016. (PSM)
FILED
2016 Sep-12 PM 02:03
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHEASTERN DIVISION
JOSE Q. MARTINEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
WARDEN CHRISTOPHER GORDY
and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR
THE STATE OF ALABAMA,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case Number: 5:15-cv-01763-LSC-JHE
Respondents.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On July 7, 2016, the magistrate judge entered a Report and Recommendation,
recommending that this petition for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed as time-barred. (Doc. 3).
No objections have been filed. 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 on September 12, 2016.
_____________________________
L. Scott Coogler
United States District Judge
160704
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?