Watson v. Michigan Department of Corrections et al

Filing 40

OPINION AND ORDER denying 37 Motion for Certificate of Appealability. Signed by District Judge Robert H Cleland. (LWag)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION DAVID WATSON, Plaintiff, v. MICHIGAN DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS, et al. Defendants. / OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S "MOTION FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY" Pending before the court is Plaintiff David Watson's "Motion for Certificate of Appealability." Plaintiff, a state inmate currently incarcerated at the Saginaw Regional Correctional Facility, filed a complaint on July 7, 2008, alleging state and federal constitutional violations under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On April 30, 2009, the court issued an order adopting the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation and granting all Defendants' motions to dismiss. Plaintiff subsequently filed a notice of appeal and the current motion. A certificate of appealability is required only in certain types of cases, typically habeas corpus proceedings brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2254 and 2255. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c). A certificate of appealability is not required, however, to appeal a district court order denying relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Johnson v. CCA-Northeast Ohio Corr. Ctr., 21 F. App'x 330, 332 (6th Cir. 2001). Case No. 08-cv-12873 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Plaintiff's Motion for Certificate of Appealability [Dkt. #37] is DENIED. s/Robert H. Cleland ROBERT H. CLELAND UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: July 2, 2009 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record on this date, July 2, 2009, by electronic and/or ordinary mail. s/Lisa G. Wagner Case Manager and Deputy Clerk (313) 234-5522 S:\Cleland\JUDGE'S DESK\C1 ORDERS\08-12873.WATSON.Deny COA..1983.eew.wpd 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?