Smith v. Hobbs

Filing 13

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 11 and dismissing 2 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Waimonushun Smith. No certificate of appealability will be issued. Signed by Judge J. Leon Holmes on 1/8/14. (kpr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
WAIMONUSHUN SMITH,
ADC# 111026
v.

PETITIONER

NO. 5:13CV00224 JLH/BD

RAY HOBBS, Director,
Arkansas Department of Correction

RESPONDENT
ORDER

The Court has reviewed the Recommended Disposition (“Recommendation”) filed by
Magistrate Judge Beth Deere. In addition, the Court has considered Mr. Smith’s objections
to the Recommendation and has reviewed de novo those portions of the Recommendation to
which Mr. Smith objects.

After careful consideration, this Court adopts the

Recommendation, with one exception, as its own. Waimonushun Smith’s petition for writ
of habeas corpus is DENIED and dismissed, with prejudice. Document #2.
When entering a final order adverse to a habeas corpus petitioner, the Court must issue
or deny a certificate of appealability. Rule 11 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases.
A certificate of appealability may issue only if a petitioner has made a substantial showing
of the denial of a constitutional right. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)-(2).
The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals held this to be a “modest standard.” Randolph
v. Kemna, 276 F.3d 401, 403 n. 1 (8th Cir. 2002) (quoting Charles v. Hickman, 228 F.3d 981,
982 n. 1 (9th Cir. 2000)). The United States Supreme Court has stated that this showing is
straightforward: The 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, 120 S. Ct. 1595, 1603 (2000).
The Arkansas Code provides that meritorious good time will not be applied to reduce
the term of an inmate’s sentence. Ark. Code Ann. § 12-29-201(d). Interpreting this statute,
the Supreme Court of Arkansas has held that “Arkansas has not created a liberty interest in
good time.” McKinnon v. Norris, 366 Ark. 404, 408, 231 S.W.3d 725, 730 (2006). That
holding conclusively closes the door on Smith’s claim that he was denied due process when
his good time credits were revoked. No certificate of appealability will be issued.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 8th day of January, 2014.

________________________________
J. LEON HOLMES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2