WATSON v. WARDEN

Filing 5

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AND DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY - Mr. Watson's petition is dismissed without prejudice. Final judgment consistent with this Order shall now issue. The Court therefore denies a certificate of appealability. See Order. Signed by Judge James Patrick Hanlon on 11/21/2022.(KAA)

Case 2:22-cv-00420-JPH-MG Document 5 Filed 11/21/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 41

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
TERRE HAUTE DIVISION
MICHAEL L. WATSON,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Petitioner,
v.
WARDEN,
Respondent.

No. 2:22-cv-00420-JPH-MG

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
AND DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY
On October 6, 2022, the Court directed the petitioner Michael Watson to explain why his
petition for a writ of habeas corpus should not be dismissed for failure to exhaust state court
remedies. Dkt. 4. The deadline has passed without response from Mr. Watson. Therefore, his
petition is dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust state court remedies.
In addition, the Court finds that a certificate of appealability shall not issue. "A state
prisoner whose petition for a writ of habeas corpus is denied by a federal district court does not
enjoy an absolute right to appeal." Buck v. Davis, 137 S. Ct. 759, 773 (2017). Instead, a state
prisoner must first obtain a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1). "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)(2). Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254
Proceedings in the United States District Courts requires the district court to "issue or deny a
certificate of appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the applicant." The petitioner has
not shown that he has exhausted state court remedies, nor that state court remedies are not available
to him. Jurists of reason would not disagree that the petition must be dismissed under these
circumstances and nothing about the claim deserves encouragement to proceed further. See Flores1

Case 2:22-cv-00420-JPH-MG Document 5 Filed 11/21/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 42

Ramirez v. Foster, 811 F.3d 861, 865 (7th Cir. 2016) (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484
(2000)). The Court therefore denies a certificate of appealability.
Mr. Watson's petition is dismissed without prejudice. Final judgment consistent with this
Order shall now issue.
SO ORDERED.
Date: 11/21/2022

Distribution:
MICHAEL L. WATSON
970433
WABASH VALLEY - CF
WABASH VALLEY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY - Inmate Mail/Parcels
Electronic Service Participant – Court Only

2