Smith v. King

N.D. Mississippi

Smith v. King

DecidedSeptember 22, 2021

Docket1:17-cv-00184

StatusUnknown

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

Bluebook

Smith v. King, (N.D. Miss. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI ABERDEEN DIVISION CHARLES SMITH, JR. PETITIONER v. No. 1:17CV184-GHD-DAS MR. RONALD KING, ET AL. RESPONDENTS Consolidated With CHARLES SMITH, JR. PETITIONER v. No. 1:19CV117-GHD-DAS RONALD KING, ET AL. RESPONDENTS

CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY The court has entered a final judgment in a habeas corpus proceeding in which the detention complained of arises out of process issued by a state court under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, and the court, considering the record in the case and the requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 22(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c), finds that, for the reasons stated in its opinion, the Petitioner has failed to “demonstrate that the issues are debatable among jurists of reason; that a court could resolve issues in a different manner; or that the questions are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.” Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893 n.4, 103 S.Ct. 3383, 3394 n.4, 77 L.Ed.2d 1090 (1993) (superseded by statute) (citations and quotations omitted); 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (1) and (2). Specifically, the court finds, for the reasons set forth in its memorandum opinion and final judgment, that the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus should be denied. Sy SO ORDERED, this, the 2 / day of September, 2021.

SENIOR 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 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI ABERDEEN DIVISION CHARLES SMITH, JR. PETITIONER v. No. 1:17CV184-GHD-DAS MR. RONALD KING, ET AL. RESPONDENTS Consolidated With CHARLES SMITH, JR. PETITIONER v. No. 1:19CV117-GHD-DAS RONALD KING, ET AL. RESPONDENTS

CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY The court has entered a final judgment in a habeas corpus proceeding in which the detention complained of arises out of process issued by a state court under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, and the court, considering the record in the case and the requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 22(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c), finds that, for the reasons stated in its opinion, the Petitioner has failed to “demonstrate that the issues are debatable among jurists of reason; that a court could resolve issues in a different manner; or that the questions are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.” Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893 n.4, 103 S.Ct. 3383, 3394 n.4, 77 L.Ed.2d 1090 (1993) (superseded by statute) (citations and quotations omitted); 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (1) and (2). Specifically, the court finds, for the reasons set forth in its memorandum opinion and final judgment, that the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus should be denied. Sy SO ORDERED, this, the 2 / day of September, 2021.

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Smith v. King, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-king-msnd-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack