Roe v. Vannoy ( 2021 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA JASON M. ROE CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. 20-2484-WBV DARREL VANNOY, ET AL. SECTION D (3) ORDER The Court, having considered the Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus By A Person In State Custody,1 the record, the applicable law, and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge,2 to which there are no objections, hereby approves the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge and adopts it as its opinion in this matter. Additionally, Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing 28 U.S.C. § 2254 proceedings provides that, “The district court must issue or deny a certificate of appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the applicant.” A court may only issue a certificate of appealability if the petitioner makes “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”3 The “controlling standard” for a certificate of appealability requires the petitioner to show “that reasonable jurists could debate whether (or, for that matter, agree that) the petition should have been resolved in a different manner or that the issues presented [are] adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed 1 R. Doc. 1. 2 R. Doc. 27. 3 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). further.”4 The Court finds that Jason M. Roe’s Petition fails to satisfy this standard. As such, the Court will not issue a certificate of appealability. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Petition of Jason M. Roe for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is DENIED and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court DENIES a certificate of appealability. New Orleans, Louisiana, December 29, 2021. (end, B Vou WENDY B. VITTER United States District Court 4 Miller-El v. Cockrell, 587 U.S, 322, 326 & 336, 123 8.Ct. 1029, 1034 & 1039, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 8.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000)) Gnternal quotation marks omitted).