Cauthern v. Bell

Filing 168

ORDER: As provided in the memorandum entered contemporaneously herewith, the following are hereby ORDERED: 1) The petitioner's 123 motion for summary judgment is DENIED. 2) The respondent's 121 motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. 3) The petitioner's 1 16 petition for federal habeas corpus relief, and all amendments thereto, are DENIED, and this action is DISMISSED. Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 03/31/2010. (ab)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION RONALD MICHAEL CAUTHERN, Petitioner, v. RICKY BELL, WARDEN, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER The petitioner is a death-row inmate. He brings this action under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging the constitutionality of his convictions and death sentence. As provided in the memorandum entered contemporaneously herewith, the following are hereby ORDERED: 1) 2) 3) The petitioner's motion for summary judgment (Docket Entry No. 123) is DENIED. The respondent's motion for summary judgment (Docket Entry No. 121) is GRANTED. The petitioner's petition for federal habeas corpus relief, and all amendments thereto (Docket Entry Nos. 1, 16), are DENIED, and this action is DISMISSED. Rule 8, Rules ­ 2254 Cases.

No. 3:04-1100 Judge Trauger

Should the petitioner file a timely notice of appeal from this Order, such notice shall be docketed as both a notice of appeal and an application for a certificate of appealability, 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Rule 22(b), Fed. R. App. P.; see Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483 (2000), which will not issue because the petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Castro v. United States of America, 310 F.3d 900, 901 (6th Cir. 2002)(citing Lyons v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth., 105 F.3d 1063, 1072 (6th Cir. 1997) and Murphy v. Ohio, 263 F.3d 466, 467 (6th Cir. 2001)).

Entry of this Order shall constitute the judgment in this action. It is so ORDERED.

Aleta A. Trauger United States District Judge

2