HODGES v. DOWLING, CIV 10-365-RAW-KEW. (2014)
Court: District Court, E.D. Oklahoma
Number: infdco20140409e32
Visitors: 17
Filed: Apr. 08, 2014
Latest Update: Apr. 08, 2014
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY RONALD A. WHITE, District Judge. Petitioner has filed a notice of intent to appeal the court's order entered March 24, 2014, denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. After a careful review of the record, the court concludes petitioner has failed to make a "substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right," as required by 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2). The court further finds that petitioner has not "demonstrate[d] that reason
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY RONALD A. WHITE, District Judge. Petitioner has filed a notice of intent to appeal the court's order entered March 24, 2014, denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. After a careful review of the record, the court concludes petitioner has failed to make a "substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right," as required by 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2). The court further finds that petitioner has not "demonstrate[d] that reasona..
More
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY
RONALD A. WHITE, District Judge.
Petitioner has filed a notice of intent to appeal the court's order entered March 24, 2014, denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. After a careful review of the record, the court concludes petitioner has failed to make a "substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right," as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). The court further finds that petitioner has not "demonstrate[d] that reasonable jurists would find [this] court's assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong." Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).
ACCORDINGLY, petitioner is denied a certificate of appealability. See Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. Plaintiff's custodian is Warden Janet Dowling, so she is the proper respondent. See Rule 2(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases; Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Ky., 410 U.S. 484, 494-95 (1973).
Source: Leagle
