Reid v. Rivard

Filing 4

OPINION and ORDER dismissing 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and denying a certificate of appealability. Signed by District Judge George Caram Steeh. (MBea)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

AMONTE REID, #756082,
Petitioner,
v.

CASE NO. 2:15-CV-14116
HONORABLE GEORGE CARAM STEEH

STEVE RIVARD,
Respondent.
________________________/
OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING THE PETITION FOR A WRIT OF
HABEAS CORPUS AND DENYING A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY
Michigan prisoner Amonte Reid (“petitioner”) has filed a pro se petition for a writ of
habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. At the time he instituted this action, however,
he did not pay the required filing fee nor submit an application to proceed in forma
pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a); 28 U.S.C. § 1915; Rule 3 of the Rules Governing §
2254 Cases. The Court, therefore, issued a deficiency order on December 3, 2015
requiring the petitioner to either pay the filing fee or submit a properly completed in forma
pauperis application. The order provided that if he did not do so within 21 days, his case
would be dismissed. The time for submitting either the filing fee or the required information
has elapsed and the petitioner has not corrected the deficiency. Accordingly, the Court
DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE the petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The Court
makes no determination as to the merits of the petition. This case is CLOSED.
Before the petitioner may appeal the Court’s decision, a certificate of appealability
must issue. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(a); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). A certificate of
-1-

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). When a federal court denies relief on
procedural grounds without addressing the merits of a habeas petition, a certificate of
appealability should issue if it is shown that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether
the petitioner 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.
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85 (2000). Reasonable jurists could not debate the
correctness of the Court’s procedural ruling. Accordingly, the Court DENIES a certificate
of appealability.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 11, 2016
s/George Caram Steeh
GEORGE CARAM STEEH
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Copies of this Order were served upon attorneys of record on
January 11, 2016, by electronic and/or ordinary mail and also
on Amonte Reid #756082, St. Louis Correctional Facility,
8585 N. Croswell Road, St. Louis, MI 48880.
s/Barbara Radke
Deputy Clerk

-2-