Lenoir v. Norris

Filing 24

ORDER denying 23 Motion for Certificate of Appealability and finding as moot 22 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Judge James M. Moody on 5/3/12. (kpr)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION ANTONIO LENOIR ADC # 116451 V. PETITIONER NO. 5:03CV0006 LARRY NORRIS, Director Arkansas Department of Corrections RESPONDENT ORDER Pending are Petitioner’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, docket # 22 and motion for certificate of appealability, docket # 23. Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 was denied and judgment was entered on July 19, 2004. Petitioner now seeks a certificate of appealability under Rule 22(b) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c). In order for this Court to grant a certificate of appealability, the petitioner must make a “substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Tiedeman v. Benson, 122 F.3d 518 (8th Cir. 1997). Granting a certificate of appealability requires a demonstration that “a reasonable jurist” would find the district court ruling on the constitutional claim “debatable or wrong.” Tennard v. Dretke, 542 U.S. 274, 282 (2004). In this case, Petitioner has failed to make such a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Accordingly, for the reasons previously stated in the order dismissing Petitioner’s petition, the motion for certificate of appealability is denied and Petitioner’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is moot. IT IS SO ORDERED this 3rd day of May, 2012. __________________________________ James M. Moody 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?