Brown v. Smith

Filing 18

ORDER denying 17 Motion for Certificate of Appealability. Signed by District Judge Terrence G. Berg. (AChu)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
2:17-CV-12097

JOSHUA MARTEZ BROWN,
Petitioner,

HON. TERRENCE G. BERG

v.
WILLIE SMITH,
Respondent.

ORDER DENYING MOTION
FOR A CERTIFICATE OF
APPEALABILITY (ECF NO. 17)

This matter is before the Court on Petitioner’s Motion for a
Certificate of Appealability (ECF No. 17). Joshua Martez Brown, a
Michigan state prisoner, filed a pro se application for the writ of habeas
corpus challenging his convictions for second-degree murder, Mich.
Comp. Laws § 750.317, assault with intent to commit murder, Mich.
Comp. Laws § 750.83, and possession of a firearm during the commission
of a felony, Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.227b.
This Court denied the habeas petition, declined to issue a certificate
of appealability, and granted Petitioner permission to appeal the Court’s
decision in forma pauperis. ECF No. 12. On December 2, 2020, Petitioner
filed a motion to alter or amend the judgment denying the writ of habeas
corpus. ECF No. 15. The Court denied that motion on June 21, 2021, and
stated the following:

In his remaining motion, Petitioner seeks a ninety-day extension of
time to file a motion for a certificate of appealability and a response
to the Court’s denial of his habeas petition. The Court, however,
denied a certificate of appealability in its dispositive opinion, and
Petitioner has already responded to the Court’s dispositive opinion.
Therefore, the motion for an extension of time is denied as moot.
Petitioner may apply to the Court of Appeals for a certificate of
appealability.
ECF No. 16, PageID.3500.
Accordingly, the Court has already addressed and denied
Petitioner’s request for a certificate of appealability and nothing provided
in Petitioner’s current motion changes that calculus. Once again, the
Court denies a certificate of appealability and the Petitioner may apply
to the Court of Appeals for a certificate of appealability.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, the Petitioner’s Motion for a Certificate
of Appealability is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: September 29,
2021

s/Terrence G. Berg
TERRENCE G. BERG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE