From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

HAAG v. HOBBS

United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Pine Bluff Division
Mar 24, 2011
5:10-cv-00370-JMM-JJV (E.D. Ark. Mar. 24, 2011)

Opinion

5:10-cv-00370-JMM-JJV.

March 24, 2011


ORDER


The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe and the parties' objections. After carefully considering the objections and making a de novo review of the record in this case, the Court concludes that the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted in their entirety as this Court's findings in all respects.

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 Mr. Haag has made a substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right. Thus, the certificate of appealability is denied.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Mr. Haag's Petition (Doc. No. 2) is DISMISSED. The requested relief is denied and any pending motions are denied as moot.


Summaries of

HAAG v. HOBBS

United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Pine Bluff Division
Mar 24, 2011
5:10-cv-00370-JMM-JJV (E.D. Ark. Mar. 24, 2011)
Case details for

HAAG v. HOBBS

Case Details

Full title:RODNEY JOSEPH HAAG ADC #141760 PETITIONER v. RAY HOBBS, Director, Arkansas…

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

Date published: Mar 24, 2011

Citations

5:10-cv-00370-JMM-JJV (E.D. Ark. Mar. 24, 2011)

Citing Cases

Briley v. Norris

Richmond v. Duke, 909 F.Supp. 626 (E.D. Ark. 1995). This claim, similar to the claim raised in Haag v. Hobbs,…