MILLER v. MCNEIL

Filing 22

ORDER DENYING THE PETITION AND DENYING A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY - The Report and Recommendation 21 is ACCEPTED. The clerk must enter judgment stating, "The petition is DENIED with prejudice." A certificate of appealability is DENIED. Signed by JUDGE ROBERT L HINKLE on 2/19/2012. (erl)

Download PDF
Page 1 of 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION RON MILLER, Petitioner, v. CASE NO. 4:09cv351-RH/WCS KENNETH S. TUCKER, Respondent. _________________________________/ ORDER DENYING THE PETITION AND DENYING A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY This petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is before the court on the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, ECF No. 21. No objections have been filed. The report and recommendation is correct and is adopted as the court’s opinion. Rule 11 of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases requires a district court to “issue or deny a certificate of appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the applicant.” Under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), a certificate of appealability may issue “only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 335-38 (2003); Case No. 4:09cv351-RH/WCS Page 2 of 3 Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483-84 (2000); Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893 n.4 (1983); see also Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362, 402-13 (2000) (setting out the standards applicable to a § 2254 petition on the merits). As the Court said in Slack: To obtain a COA under § 2253(c), a habeas prisoner must make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, a demonstration that, under Barefoot, includes showing that reasonable jurists could debate whether (or, for that matter, agree that) the petition should have been resolved in a different manner or that the issues presented were “ ‘adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.’ ” Slack, 529 U.S. at 483-84 (quoting Barefoot, 463 U.S. at 893 n.4). Further, in order to obtain a certificate of appealability when dismissal is based on procedural grounds, a petitioner must show, “at least, that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling.” Id. at 484. The petitioner has not made the required showing. For these reasons, IT IS ORDERED: 1. The report and recommendation is ACCEPTED. 2. The clerk must enter judgment stating, “The petition is DENIED with prejudice.” Case No. 4:09cv351-RH/WCS Page 3 of 3 3. A certificate of appealability is DENIED. 4. The clerk must close the file. SO ORDERED on February 19, 2012. s/Robert L. Hinkle United States District Judge Case No. 4:09cv351-RH/WCS

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?