Gunter v. Steward

Filing 42

ORDER: For the reasons explained in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, the Court finds that Gunter is not entitled to relief on the basis of the grounds articulated in his petition. Accordingly, the petition (ECF No. 1) is hereby DENIED and this matter is DISMISSED. The Court DENIES a COA. Signed by District Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 6/13/14. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(af)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NORTHEASTERN DIVISION

JOSEPH GUNTER,
Petitioner,
v.
HENRY STEWARD,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:13-cv-00010
Judge Sharp

ORDER
Joseph Gunter, a prisoner in state custody at the Northwest Correctional Complex in Tiptonville,
Tennessee, has filed a petition for the writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (ECF No. 1),
challenging his conviction in the Circuit Court for Fentress County, Tennessee. The Court previously
entered an order denying the respondent’s motion for summary judgment on statute-of-limitations
grounds and directing the respondent to answer the petition on the merits. The respondent filed his
answer to the petition (ECF No. 35), along with copies of the relevant portions of the underlying statecourt record, and the respondent filed a reply (ECF No. 40). The petition is ripe for review.
For the reasons explained in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, the Court finds that
Gunter is not entitled to relief on the basis of the grounds articulated in his petition. Accordingly, the
petition (ECF No. 1) is hereby DENIED and this matter is DISMISSED.
In addition, as also explained in the Memorandum Opinion, the Court finds that an appeal by the
petitioner on any of the issues raised in this petition would not merit further attention. The Court therefore
DENIES a COA. The petitioner may, however, seek a COA directly from the Sixth Circuit Court of
Appeals.
It is so ORDERED.
The Clerk is directed to enter final judgment in accordance with Rule 58 of the Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure.

Kevin H. Sharp
United States District Judge