GALBREATH v. PATTON, CIV 12-381-RAW-KEW. (2015)
Court: District Court, E.D. Oklahoma
Number: infdco20151008c52
Visitors: 4
Filed: Oct. 07, 2015
Latest Update: Oct. 07, 2015
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY RONALD A. WHITE , District Judge . On September 29, 2015, the court affirmed and adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation and dismissed petitioner's 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 petitioner has not s
Summary: OPINION AND ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY RONALD A. WHITE , District Judge . On September 29, 2015, the court affirmed and adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation and dismissed petitioner's 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 petitioner has not sh..
More
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY
RONALD A. WHITE, District Judge.
On September 29, 2015, the court affirmed and adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation and dismissed petitioner's 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 petitioner has not shown "at least, 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 [this] court was correct in its procedural ruling." 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.
Source: Leagle
