Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Johnson v. Jones

United States District Court, N.D. Alabama, Southern Division

June 25, 2015

LARRY JOHN JOHNSON, Petitioner,
v.
WARDEN KARLA JONES and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF ALABAMA, Respondents.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

KARON OWEN BOWDRE, Chief District Judge.

On May 4, 2015, the magistrate judge entered a Report and Recommendation, (doc. 7), recommending that this petition for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed with prejudice, and the petitioner filed his objections on May 11, 2015.[1] (Doc. 8).

In his objections, the petitioner reiterates that the court should reconsider his sentence of life imprisonment under Ala. Code § 13A-5-9.1 and contends that the state's failure to do so violates the Equal Protection clause. However, he provides no additional support and fails to explain how the magistrate judge's conclusion was in error. As the magistrate judge explained, the petitioner fails to support his equal protection claim or even allege he was treated differently than others based on race, religion, or national origin. As such, the court OVERRULES the petitioner's objections.

Having considered the entire file in this action de novo, including the report and recommendation and the petitioner's objections, the court ADOPTS the magistrate judge's report and ACCEPTS his recommendation to dismiss the habeas petition with prejudice. The court will enter a separate Order in conformity with this Memorandum Opinion.

The 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 further, " Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003) (internal quotations omitted).

The court finds that the petitioner's claims do not satisfy either standard and DECLINES to issue a certificate of appealability in this case.

DONE and ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.