-WLB Hampton v. Barrow et al, No. 1:2011cv00084 - Document 17 (S.D. Ga. 2012)

Court Description: ORDER adopting the 12 Report and Recommendations; granting 7 Motion to Dismiss Samuel S. Olens; denying a COA in this case; dismissing the instant § 2254 petition; and directing final judgment be entered in favor of Respondent Barrow. Signed by Judge J. Randal Hall on 02/10/2012. (thb)

Download PDF
-WLB Hampton v. Barrow et al Doc. 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA AUGUSTA DIVISION RODRIQUEZ DAVID HAMILTON, Petitioner, CV 111-084 MA DONALD BARROW, Warden, and SAMUEL S. OLENS, Attorney General of the State of Georgia, Respondents. 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).1 Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court. Therefore, Respondent Olens is DISMISSED, from this case, and Respondent Barrow's motion to dismiss is GRANTED. (Doe. no. 7.) Furthermore, a prisoner seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 must obtain a certificate of appealability ("COA") before appealing the denial of his 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 applicant." Rule 11(a) to the Rules Governing Section 2254 'Petitioner requested, and was granted, an extension of time in which to object to the Report and Recommendation. (Doc. nos. 14, 15.) Dockets.Justia.com 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, a COA is DENIED in this case. 2 Moreover, because there are no non-frivolous issues to raise on appeal, an appeal would not be taken in good faith. Accordingly, Petitioner is not entitled to appeal in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). Upon the foregoing, the instant § 2254 petition is DISMISSED, and a final judgment shall be ENTERED in favor of Respondent Barrow. SO ORDERED this of February, 2012, at Augusta, Georgia. BLE J. RM. DAL HALL STATES DISTRICT JUDGE RN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA 2"If the court denies a certificate, [a party] 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. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.