Theriot v. Glenis, No. 4:2016cv00248 - Document 12 (E.D. Ark. 2016)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 9 Findings and Recommendations in their entirety. Petitioner's 10 Motion for extension of time is DENIED, however, he has also filed a Brief, which the Court will consider as his Objections to the recommendation. The Court finds no issue on which petitioner has made a substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right. Thus, the certificate of appealability is denied. Signed by Judge James M. Moody Jr. on 8/23/2016. (mcz)

Download PDF
Theriot v. Glenis Doc. 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JOHNNY P. THERIOT VS. PETITIONER CASE NO. 4:16CV00248 JM/PSH C. V. GLENIS, Sheriff RESPONDENT ORDER The Court has received proposed Findings and Recommendations from Magistrate Judge Patricia S. Harris. Petitioner has filed a motion for extension of time, however he has also filed a Brief which the Court will consider as his Objections to the recommendation. The motion for extension of time is DENIED. After careful review of the Findings and Recommendations, the timely objections received thereto, and a de novo review of the record, the Court concludes that the Findings and Recommendations should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted in their entirety as this Court's findings in all respects. Judgment will be entered accordingly. 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). The Court finds no issue on which petitioner has made a substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right. Thus, the certificate of appealability is denied. IT IS SO ORDERED this 23rd day of August, 2016. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dockets.Justia.com

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.