Ruffin v. Humphrey, No. 1:2011cv00034 - Document 27 (S.D. Ga. 2012)
Court Description: ORDER adopting the 19 Report and Recommendation; denying the 2254 petition; denying COA in this case; closing this civil action; and directing that final judgment be entered in favor of Respondent. Signed by Judge J. Randal Hall on 07/11/2012. (thb)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Ruffin v. Humphrey Doc. 27 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA AUGUSTA DIVISION ANTONIO WELLINGTON RUFFIN, Petitioner, V. CARL HUMPHREY, Warden, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) CV 111-034 ) ) ) ) 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. nos. 23, 25, 26).' Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court. Therefore, the instant petition brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is DENIED. Furthermore, a prisoner seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 must obtain a certificate of appealability ("COX) 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 Proceedings. This Court should grant a COA only if the prisoner makes a "substantial 'Petitioner requested and was granted an extension of time in which to object to the Report and Recommendation. (Doc. nos. 21, 22.) Petitioner then submitted three filings that set forth objections (doc. nos. 23, 25, 26), as well as a notice of documents that he had filed in his state habeas proceeding. (doc. no. 24). Dockets.Justia.com 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, this civil action is CLOSED, and a final judgment shall be ENTERED in favor of Respondent. SO ORDERED this J /day of __74,L ,2012, at Augusta, Georgia. BLE J. RLNDAL 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.
]]>
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.
