Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

Thurmond v. Hobbs

United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Pine Bluff Division

December 24, 2014

SAM EDWARD THURMOND, SR., Petitioner,
v.
RAY HOBBS, Director of the Arkansas Department of Correction, Respondent.

ORDER

BRIAN S. MILLER, District Judge.

The proposed findings and recommendations from Magistrate Judge H. David Young have been received, along with the objections thereto. After careful review of the findings and recommendations, the objections, and a de novo review of the record, it is concluded that the findings and recommendations should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted in their entirety in all respects. Additionally, petitioner Sam Edward Thurmond, Sr.'s motion to appoint counsel [Doc. No. 20] is denied because the issues are neither factually nor legally complex, and he appears to be able to adequately present his claims. See Phillips v. Jasper County Jail, 437 F.3d 791, 794 (8th Cir. 2006).

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 and Rule 11 of the Rules Governing Section 2554 Cases in the United States District Court, the court must determine whether to issue a certificate of appealability in the final order. In § 2254 cases, a certificate of appealability may issue only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)-(2). As there is no issue on which petitioner has made a substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right, the certificate of appealability is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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