COLLINS v. CREWS
Filing
22
ORDER DENYING THE PETITION AND DENYING A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY - The 23 report and recommendation is accepted. The motion to dismiss, ECF No. 19 , is granted. The clerk must enter judgment stating, "The petition is dismissed as untimely." A certificate of appealability is denied. The clerk must close the file. Signed by JUDGE ROBERT L HINKLE on 1/5/2017. (tdl)
Page 1 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TALLAHASSEE DIVISION
ANDRE COLLINS,
Petitioner,
v.
CASE NO. 4:14cv294-RH/CAS
JULIE L. JONES, Secretary,
Department of Corrections,
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 respondent’s motion to dismiss, ECF No. 19, and the magistrate
judge’s report and recommendation, ECF No. 23. 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); Slack
Case No. 4:14cv294-RH/CAS
Page 2 of 3
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.’ ”
529 U.S. at 483-84 (quoting Barefoot, 463 U.S. at 893 n.4). Further, 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. This order thus denies a
certificate of appealability.
For these reasons,
IT IS ORDERED:
1. The report and recommendation is accepted.
2. The motion to dismiss, ECF No. 19, is granted.
Case No. 4:14cv294-RH/CAS
Page 3 of 3
3. The clerk must enter judgment stating, “The petition is dismissed as
untimely.”
4. A certificate of appealability is denied.
5. The clerk must close the file.
SO ORDERED on January 5, 2017.
s/Robert L. Hinkle
United States District Judge
Case No. 4:14cv294-RH/CAS
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?