Whatley v. Lee

Filing 20

ORDER ADOPTING 18 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS, dismissing this case with prejudice. A certificate of appealability should not issue for the reasons set forth herein. A separate judgment will be entered. Signed by District Judge Tom S. Lee on 12/4/15 (*copy mailed to Wallace W. Whatley # 39566, MSP, Unit 30-C, A-Zone, Bed #88, Parchman, MS 38738) (LWE)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI NORTHERN DIVISION WALLACE W. WHATLEY VS. PETITIONER CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:14CV21TSL-JCG ERNEST LEE RESPONDENT ORDER This cause came on this date to be heard upon the report and recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge John C. Gargiulo, and the court, having fully reviewed the report and recommendation entered in this cause on November 4, 2015, and being duly advised in the premises, finds that said report and recommendation should be adopted as the opinion of this court. IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the report and recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge John C. Gargiulo entered on November 4, 2015, be, and the same is hereby adopted as the finding of this court, and the petition for writ of habeas corpus is hereby dismissed with prejudice. It is further ordered that a certificate of appealability should not issue. Petitioner has failed to demonstrate that “jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right” and that "jurists of reason would find it debatable whether [this] court was correct in its procedural ruling." Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S. Ct. 1595, 146 L. Ed. 2d 542 (2000). A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. SO ORDERED this 4th day of December, 2015. /s/Tom S. Lee UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?