Hale v. Shaw

S.D. Mississippi

Hale v. Shaw

DecidedMarch 18, 2020

Docket1:19-cv-00242

StatusUnknown

This text of Hale v. Shaw (Hale v. Shaw) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Mississippi primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hale v. Shaw, (S.D. Miss. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI SOUTHERN DIVISION

JOHN HALE § PETITIONER § § v. § Civil No. 1:19cv242-HSO-MTP § § UNKNOWN SHAW § RESPONDENT

CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

A final order adverse to the applicant having been filed in the captioned habeas corpus case, in which the detention complained of arises out of process issued by a state court or a proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, the Court, considering the record in the case and the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 2253, Rule 22(b) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, and Rule 11(a) of the RULES GOVERNING SECTION 2254 CASES FOR THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTS, hereby finds that: A Certificate of Appealability should not issue in this case. Jurists of reason could not conclude that the Court’s dismissal on procedural grounds was debatable or incorrect or that the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).

s/ Halil Suleyman Ozerden Date: March 18, 2020

HALIL SULEYMAN OZERDEN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI SOUTHERN DIVISION

JOHN HALE § PETITIONER § § v. § Civil No. 1:19cv242-HSO-MTP § § UNKNOWN SHAW § RESPONDENT

CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

A final order adverse to the applicant having been filed in the captioned habeas corpus case, in which the detention complained of arises out of process issued by a state court or a proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, the Court, considering the record in the case and the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 2253, Rule 22(b) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, and Rule 11(a) of the RULES GOVERNING SECTION 2254 CASES FOR THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTS, hereby finds that: A Certificate of Appealability should not issue in this case. Jurists of reason could not conclude that the Court’s dismissal on procedural grounds was debatable or incorrect or that the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).

s/ Halil Suleyman Ozerden Date: March 18, 2020

HALIL SULEYMAN OZERDEN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Hale v. Shaw, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hale-v-shaw-mssd-2020.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack