Palmer v. Cain et al

Filing 19

ORDER denying 18 Motion for Certificate of Appealability. Signed by District Judge Debra M. Brown on 6/5/2024. (jla)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
OXFORD DIVISION
RICHARD PALMER

PLAINTIFF

V.

NO. 3:23-CV-420-DMB-JMV

BURL CAIN, et al.

DEFENDANTS
ORDER

On April 18, 2024, this Court dismissed with prejudice Richard Palmer’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983
claims alleging Eighth Amendment violations for the denial and delay of medical care, and entered
judgment accordingly. Docs. #15, #16. On May 22, 2024, Palmer filed a pro se motion requesting
“a certificate of appealability to appeal to the Fifth (5th) Circuit Court ….” Doc. #18 at PageID
75. Because a certificate of appealability is only required for habeas cases filed under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2254 1 or 28 U.S.C. § 2255 2 and is not required to appeal cases filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
1983, Palmer’s motion for a certificate of appealability [18] is DENIED.
SO ORDERED, this 5th day of June, 2024.
/s/Debra M. Brown
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1

Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts.

Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings for the United States District Courts; see 28 U.S.C. §
2253(c)(1)(B) (“Unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability, an appeal may not be taken to the
court of appeals from the final order in a proceeding under section 2255.”).
2