Hagler v. Alabama, State of, No. 6:2017cv00478 - Document 12 (N.D. Ala. 2017)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION Signed by Chief Judge Karon O Bowdre on 8/31/17. (SAC )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Hagler v. Alabama, State of Doc. 12 FILED 2017 Aug-31 AM 11:13 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA JASPER DIVISION JEFFERY HAGLER, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Petitioner, v. STATE OF ALABAMA, Respondent. Case No.: 6:17-cv-00478-KOB-JHE MEMORANDUM OPINION On August 4, 2017, the magistrate judge entered a Report and Recommendation, (doc. 11), recommending that the court dismiss with prejudice the petition for writ of habeas corpus because it is time-barred. No objections have been filed. The court has considered the entire file in this action, together with the report and recommendation, and has reached an independent conclusion that the report and recommendation is due to be adopted and approved. After considering the entire file in this action, including the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the court ADOPTS the magistrate’s report and ACCEPTS his recommendation. The court finds that the petition for writ of habeas corpus is due to be dismissed as time-barred. This court may issue a certificate of appealability “only if the applicant has a made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2). To make such a showing, a “petitioner must demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong,” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000), or that “the issues presented were adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed Dockets.Justia.com further.” Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003) (internal quotations omitted). This court finds Petitioner’s claims do not satisfy either standard. The court will enter a separate Final Order. DONE and ORDERED this 31st day of August, 2017. ____________________________________ KARON OWEN BOWDRE CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
