Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Lenz v. Norris

November 14, 2006

MICHAEL DAVID LENZ ADC #96671 PETITIONER
v.
LARRY NORRIS, DIRECTOR, ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION RESPONDENT



ORDER

By judgment entered September 18, 2006 (docket entry #53), this 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for writ of habeas corpus was dismissed. Petitioner has filed a pro se notice of appeal and an application for certificate of appealability (docket entries #60, #61). He states that he is appealing the denial of habeas relief only as to his state convictions for first degree murder, arson and aggravated robbery.

Before a federal habeas petitioner may proceed with an appeal, he must seek and obtain a certificate of appealability (COA). 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 335-36 (2003) (COA is jurisdictional prerequisite to an appeal). To be entitled to a COA, an applicant must make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). He is required to indicate which issues satisfy the showing. Id. § 2253(c)(3). A substantial showing is a demonstration that reasonable jurists could debate whether the petition should have been resolved in a different manner, or that the issues presented deserve further proceedings. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483-84 (2000).

In the instant case, the Court found that all of Petitioner's claims were procedurally defaulted and that he had not demonstrated cause and prejudice, or actual innocence.

Here, Petitioner again states that he is innocent of the charges and was subjected to ineffective counsel and "prosecutorial withholding." He has failed to make a substantial showing that reasonable jurists would differ as to this Court's rejection of his claims or that they are otherwise entitled to further review.

Accordingly, Petitioner's application for a certificate of appealability (docket entry #61) is DENIED. The Clerk of the Court is directed to forward this order, along with the file of this Court's proceedings, to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 22(b)(1).

IT IS SO ORDERED this 14th day of November, 2006.

20061114

© 1992-2006 VersusLaw ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.