Ford v. Jenkins

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI GREENVILLE DIVISION

STEVENSON FORD PETITIONER

V. NO. 4:18-CV-67-DMB-DAS

LEPHER JENKINS, et al. RESPONDENTS

ORDER

On August 14, 2018, United States Magistrate Judge David A. Sanders issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that Stevenson Ford’s petition for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed as untimely. Doc. #13. Because this Court did not receive objections from Ford, it reviewed the R&R for clear error and, finding none, dismissed the case with prejudice on January 3, 2019. Docs. #19, #20. Ford subsequently moved for reconsideration on the ground that he mailed objections but that the document was lost in the mail. Docs. #21, #24. This Court, considering the objections timely filed but finding them without substantive merit, denied reconsideration. Doc. #26. Ford subsequently moved for a certificate of appealability. Doc. #27. Rule 11 of the Rules Governing § 2254 Proceedings for the United States District Courts requires a court to “issue or deny a certificate of appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the applicant.” A certificate of appealability (“COA”) will issue “only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). For cases rejected on their merits, a movant “must demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong” to warrant a COA. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). To obtain a COA on a claim rejected on procedural grounds, a movant must demonstrate “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.” Id. at 484. Based on the Slack criteria, the Court, for the reasons set forth in its order denying reconsideration, finds that a COA should not issue in this case. Accordingly, Ford’s motion for a certificate of appealability [27] is DENIED. SO ORDERED, this 26th day of November, 2019.

/s/Debra M. Brown UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE