Meirovitz v. Haynes

Filing 12

ORDER ADOPTING 10 Report and Recommendations except in one respect; the motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence filed by petitioner is dismissed; the Court will, however, issue a certificate of appealability as to the question of whether Meirovitz is entitled to relief under 28 USC 2241. Signed by Judge J. Leon Holmes on 11/21/13. (vjt)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
EASTERN DIVISION
SHERMAN RAY MEIROVITZ
v.

PETITIONER
NO. 2:13CV00085 JLH

ANTHONY HAYNES, Warden,
FCI Forrest City, Arkansas

RESPONDENT
ORDER

The Court has received findings and a recommendation from United States Magistrate Judge
H. David Young. After a careful review of the findings and recommendation, the timely objections,
and a de novo review of the record, the Court concludes that the findings and recommendation should
be and hereby are approved and adopted as this Court’s findings except in one respect. The motion
to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 filed by Sherman Ray
Meirovitz is dismissed. The Court will, however, issue a certificate of appealability as to the question
of whether Meirovitz is entitled to relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The statute provides that a
certificate of appealability may issue only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial
of a constitutional right. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). “A substantial showing is a showing that issues
are debatable among reasonable jurists, a court could resolve the issues differently, or the issues
deserve further proceedings.” Cox v. Norris, 133 F.3d 565, 569 (8th Cir. 1997). While the
undersigned agrees with Magistrate Judge Young’s conclusion that, under Eighth Circuit precedent,
Meirovitz is not entitled to relief, reasonable jurists could disagree. See Brown v. Caraway, 719 F.3d
583 (7th Cir. 2013).
IT IS SO ORDERED this 21st day of November, 2013.

J. LEON HOLMES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE