Filed: Nov. 13, 2015
Latest Update: Nov. 13, 2015
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION KARON OWEN BOWDRE , Chief District Judge . On October 20, 2015, the magistrate judge entered a Report and Recommendation, (doc. 15), recommending that this petition for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed with prejudice. No party filed any objections. The court has considered the entire file in this action, together with the report and recommendation, and has reached an independent conclusion that the report and recommendation is due to be adopted and approved. Accordingl
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION KARON OWEN BOWDRE , Chief District Judge . On October 20, 2015, the magistrate judge entered a Report and Recommendation, (doc. 15), recommending that this petition for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed with prejudice. No party filed any objections. The court has considered the entire file in this action, together with the report and recommendation, and has reached an independent conclusion that the report and recommendation is due to be adopted and approved. Accordingly..
More
MEMORANDUM OPINION
KARON OWEN BOWDRE, Chief District Judge.
On October 20, 2015, the magistrate judge entered a Report and Recommendation, (doc. 15), recommending that this petition for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed with prejudice. No party filed any objections. The court has considered the entire file in this action, together with the report and recommendation, and has reached an independent conclusion that the report and recommendation is due to be adopted and approved.
Accordingly, the court hereby adopts and approves the findings and recommendation of the magistrate judge as the findings and conclusions of this court. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is due to be DISMISSED. A separate Order will be entered.
This court may issue a certificate of appealability "only if the applicant has a made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). To make such a showing, a "petitioner must demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong," Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000), or that "the issues presented were adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further," Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003) (internal quotations omitted). This ourt finds Petitioner's claims do not satisfy either standard, and will not enter such a certificate.
DONE and ORDERED.
