Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

CLEM v. HOBBS, 5:11-cv-235-DPM. (2012)

Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas Number: infdco20120720845 Visitors: 27
Filed: Jul. 19, 2012
Latest Update: Jul. 19, 2012
Summary: ORDER D.P. MARSHALL, Jr., District Judge. Clem's motion for certificate of appealability, Document No. 18, is denied. 28 U.S.C. 2253(c). Because the Court denied Clem's petition on procedural grounds, Clem must show "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 the district court was correct in its procedural ruling." Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S
More

ORDER

D.P. MARSHALL, Jr., District Judge.

Clem's motion for certificate of appealability, Document No. 18, is denied. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c). Because the Court denied Clem's petition on procedural grounds, Clem must show "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 the district court was correct in its procedural ruling." Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000) (emphasis added). Clem has addressed only the latter element in his motion. Document No. 18, at 3-4. The motion, Document No. 18, is therefore denied. Slack, 529 U.S. at 485 (requiring that both showings be made before the Court of Appeals may entertain the appeal). Moreover, the Court sees no debatable issue about the standard of review applied here.

So Ordered.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer