Jackson v. Warden Wheeler Correctional Facility

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA DUBLIN DIVISION SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA WILLIAM R. JACKSON, ) JUL 12 2024 ) Petitioner, FILED v. ) CV 324-026 ) TYRONE OLIVER, Commissioner, ) Georgia Department of Corrections, ) ) Respondent. | )

ORDER

After a careful, de novo review of the file, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, to which objections have been filed. (Doc. no. 16.) Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as its opinion, DISMISSES the instant petition, brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, without prejudice, and DENIES as MOOT Petitioner’s motions, (doc. nos. 2, 4-5, 8-12, 17). Further, a prisoner seeking relief under § 2254 must obtain a certificate of appealability (“COA”) before appealing the denial of her application for a writ of habeas corpus. This Court “must issue or deny a certificate of appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the

' Upon review of the record, the Court notes Petitioner is currently incarcerated at Wheeler Correctional Facility, a private prison operated by a corporation pursuant to a contract with the Georgia Department of Corrections. Stephens v. Laughlin, No. CV 115-151, doc. no. 7 (S.D. Ga. Jan. 18, 2017) (explaining “private prison” relationship between Wheeler Correctional Facility and Georgia Department of Corrections). Accordingly, the Court DIRECTS the CLERK to substitute Commissioner Tyrone Oliver as the proper Respondent. See Turner v. Oliver, No. CV 122-132, doc. no. 9 (S.D. Ga. June 28, 2023) (explaining Commissioner is proper Respondent in private prison context under O.C.G.A. § 42-2-6 and Rule 2(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases).

applicant.” Rule 11(a) to the Rules Governing Section 2254 Proceedings. This Court should grant a COA only if the prisoner makes a “substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). For the reasons set forth in the Report and Recommendation, and in consideration of the standards enunciated in Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 482-84 (2000), Petitioner has failed to make the requisite showing. Accordingly, the Court DENIES

a COA in this case.* Moreover, because there are no non-frivolous issues to raise on appeal, an appeal would not be taken in good faith, and Petitioner is not entitled to appeal in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). Upon the foregoing, the Court CLOSES this civil action. | Vt SO ORDERED this □ day of July, 2024, at Augusta, Georgia. /)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUBGE

? “If the court denies a certificate, the parties may not appeal the denial but may seek a certificate from the court of appeals under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22.” Rule 11(a) to the Rules Governing Section 2254 Proceedings.