May v. Jackson

Filing 48

ORDER approving and adopting 39 proposed findings and recommendations; denying 46 motion for certificate of appealability; finding as moot 40 motion for extension of time to file objections; denying 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 motion for reconsideration, motions to renew, and motion for hearing; and dismissing, with prejudice, 2 petition for writ of habeas corpus. Signed by Judge James M. Moody Jr. on 1/7/2025. (ldb)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION PARNELL R MAY ADC #153557 V. PETITIONER CASE NO. 4:23-cv-00350-JM DEXTER PAYNE RESPONDENT ORDER The Court has received proposed findings and recommendations from United States Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney. After careful review of the findings and recommendations and the timely objections thereto, as well as a de novo review of the record, the Court concludes that the findings and recommendations should be, and are hereby, approved and adopted as this Court’s findings in their entirety. The Court will not issue a certificate of appealability because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)-(2). Because the Court will not issue a certificate of appealability, it certifies that an appeal in forma pauperis would not be taken in good faith. Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3)(A). Petitioner’s motion for certificate of appealability (ECF No. 46) is DENIED. Petitioner’s motion for extension of time to file objections (ECF No. 40) is MOOT and his motion for reconsideration, motions to renew, and motion for hearing (ECF Nos. 42, 43, 44, 45) are DENIED. The petition for writ of habeas corpus (ECF No. 2) is DISMISSED with prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED this 7th day of January, 2025. __________________________________ 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?