Adams v. Hobbs
Filing
8
ORDER APROVING AND ADOPTING 7 PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS in their entirety as this Court's findings in all respects; dismissing 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus with prejudice; denying all pending motions as moot; and denying the certificate of appealability. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 10/15/2014. (rhm)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
BILLY TERRELL ADAMS
ADC #101322
v.
PETITIONER
Case No. 5:14-cv-00067-KGB-JTK
RAY HOBBS, Director,
Arkansas Department of Correction
RESPONDENT
ORDER
The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommendations submitted by
United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe (Dkt. No. 7). No objections have been filed, and the
time for filing objections has passed. After careful consideration, the Court concludes that the
Proposed Findings and Recommendations should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted in
their entirety as this Court's findings in all respects. It is therefore ordered that petitioner Billy
Terrell Adams’s petition for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed with prejudice. The requested
relief is denied, and all pending motions are denied as moot.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 and Rule 11 of the Rules Governing Section 2554 Cases in
the United States District Court, the Court must determine whether to issue a certificate of
appealability. In § 2254 cases, 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)(1)-(2).
The Court finds no issue on which Mr. Adams has made a substantial showing of a denial of a
constitutional right. Thus, the certificate of appealability is denied.
SO ORDERED this the 15th day of October, 2014.
________________________________
KRISTINE G. BAKER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2
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?