Williams v. Hartley et al
JUDGMENT in favor of Attorney General of the State of Colorado, The, Steven Hartley against Billie Don Williams, by Clerk on 2/27/2014. (trlee, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 13-cv-01258-RM
BILLIE DON WILLIAMS,
STEVEN HARTLEY, Warden, Arkansas Valley Correctional Facility, and
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF COLORADO,
In accordance with the orders filed during the pendency of this case, and
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(a), the following Final Judgment is hereby entered.
Pursuant to the Order Denying 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Application [Doc. No. 29, filed
February 27, 2014] it is
ORDERED that the Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2254 [Doc. No. 1, filed May 13, 2013], filed pro se by Applicant Billie Don
Williams, is DENIED and this case is DISMISSED on the merits. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that there is no basis on which to issue a certificate of
appealability pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) because Applicant has not made a
substantial showing that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether jurisdictional
and procedural rulings are correct and whether the Application states a valid claim of
the denial of a constitutional right. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is
denied. The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this
order would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status will be
denied for the purpose of appeal. See Coppedge v. United State, 369 U.S. 438 (1962).
If Applicant files a notice of appeal he must also pay the full $505 appellate filing fee or
file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis in the United State Court of Appeals for the
Tenth Circuit within thirty days in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 24.
Dated at Denver, Colorado this 27th day of February, 2014.
FOR THE COURT:
JEFFREY P. COLWELL, CLERK
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?