Pabon-Mandrell v. USA, No. 3:2023cv01050 - Document 5 (D.P.R. 2024)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER. The Court hereby adopts the 4 Report and Recommendation and as such hereby DENIES petitioner's § 2255 petition at ECF No. 1. Applying the standard here, jurists of reason would not find it debatable whether petitioner's claims should be denied. Accordingly, the COA is DENIED. The case is thus DISMISSED. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge Aida M. Delgado-Colon on 6/29/2024.(wm)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Pabon-Mandrell v. USA Doc. 5 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO EDUARDO PABON-MANDRELL, Petitioner v. Civ. No. 23-1050 (ADC) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, [Related Case No. 07-121-5 (ADC)] Respondent OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is U.S. Magistrate Judge Héctor L. Ramos-Vega’s (“Magistrate Judge”) Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that the Court deny petitioner Eduardo Pabón-Mandrell’s 28 U.S.C. § 2255 successive petition. ECF No. 4. The Magistrate Judge indicated that pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) and L. Civ. R. 72, petitioner had fourteen days to file any objections to the R&R, which were due on or before December 26, 2023. ECF No. 4. The record reflects that, as of this date, petitioner has not filed any objections to the R&R. As such, the Report and Recommendation is deemed as unopposed and submitted to the Court for final determination. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. After carefully reviewing the Magistrate Judge’s R&R, the filings and the record, the Court hereby adopts the R&R, and as such hereby DENIES petitioner’s § 2255 petition at ECF No. 1. Dockets.Justia.com Civil No. 23-1050 (ADC) Page 2 Pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing § 2255 Proceedings, a “district court must issue or deny a certificate of appealability (“COA”) when it enters a final order adverse to the applicant.” Rules Governing § 2255 Proceedings, Rule 11, 28 U.S.C. § 2255. To merit a COA, an applicant must make “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). “When the district court denies a habeas petition on procedural grounds without reaching the prisoner’s underlying constitutional claim, a [certificate of appealability] should issue when the prisoner shows, at least, that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Applying the standard here, jurists of reason would not find it debatable whether petitioner’s claims should be denied. Accordingly, the COA is DENIED. The case is thus DISMISSED. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly. SO ORDERED. At San Juan, Puerto Rico, on this 29th day of January 2024. S/AIDA M. DELGADO-COLÓN United States District Judge
]]>
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.
