Gilpin v. Ryan et al
ORDER ADOPTING 43 Report and Recommendations and all other pending Motions ( 38 42 39 40 41 37 34 ) are Denied as Moot. A Certificate of Appealability is denied. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment and close the file. Signed by Judge Jennifer G Zipps on 1/16/13. (SMBE)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
No. CV-10-700-TUC-JGZ (BGM)
James Van Gilpin,
Charles L. Ryan, et al.,
Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by United
States Magistrate Judge Bruce G. Macdonald that recommends denying Petitioner’s
habeas petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2254. (Doc. 43.) As thoroughly explained
by Magistrate Judge Macdonald, Petitioner is not entitled to relief as his petition is
without merit. As Petitioner’s objections do not undermine the analysis and proper
conclusion reached by Magistrate Judge Macdonald, Petitioner’s objections are rejected
and the Report and Recommendation is adopted.
Before Petitioner can appeal this Court's judgment, a certificate of appealability
must issue. See 28 U.S.C. §2253(c) and Fed. R. App. P. 22(b)(1). Federal Rule of
Appellate Procedure 22(b) requires the district court that rendered a judgment denying
the petition made pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2254 to "either issue a certificate of
appealability or state why a certificate should not issue."
Additionally, 28 U.S.C.
§2253(c)(2) provides that a certificate may issue "only if the applicant has made a
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." In the certificate, the court
must indicate which specific issues satisfy this showing. See 28 U.S.C. §2253(c)(3). A
substantial showing is made when the resolution of an issue of appeal is debatable among
reasonable jurists, if courts could resolve the issues differently, or if the issue deserves
further proceedings. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85 (2000). Upon review
of the record in light of the standards for granting a certificate of appealability, the Court
concludes that a certificate shall not issue as the resolution of the petition is not debatable
among reasonable jurists and does not deserve further proceedings.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:
(1) The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 43) is accepted and adopted;
(2) Petitioner’s §2254 Amended Petition (Doc. 5) is denied and this case is dismissed
(3) All other pending Motions (Docs. 34, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41 and 42) are DENIED AS
(3) A Certificate of Appealability is denied and shall not issue; and
(4) The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly and close the file in this
Dated this 16th day of January, 2013.
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?