From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Espinal v. Warden, Noble Correctional Institution

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division
May 1, 2007
Case Number: 1:05cv812 (S.D. Ohio May. 1, 2007)

Summary

rejecting claims challenging agreed-to sentence under plea bargain that was entered voluntarily and knowingly

Summary of this case from Canady v. Warden, Lebanon Correctional Institution

Opinion

Case Number: 1:05cv812.

May 1, 2007


ORDER


The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendations of United States Magistrate Judge Timothy S. Hogan filed on April 9, 2007 (Doc. 11), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and noting that no objections have been filed thereto and that the time for filing such objections under Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b) expired April 27, 2007, hereby ADOPTS said Report and Recommendations.

Accordingly, Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1) is DENIED with prejudice.

A certificate of appealability will not issue with respect to claims for relief which this Court has concluded are barred from review on procedural waiver grounds, because under the first prong of the applicable two-part standard enunciated in Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85 (2000), "jurists of reason" would not find it debatable whether the Court is correct in its procedural rulings.

A certificate also will not issue with respect to claims fo r relief that were addressed on the merits herein, because petitioner has not made a substantial showing that he has stated a "viable claim of the denial of a constitutional right" that is "adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further." See Slack, 529 U.S. at 475 (citing Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893 n. 4 (1983); see also 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed.R.App.P. 22(b).

With respect to any application by petitioner to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis, the Court will certify pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal of any Order adopting this Report and Recommendation will not be taken in "good faith," and, therefore, DENY petitioner leave to appeal in forma pauperis upon a showing of financial necessity. See Fed.R.App.P. 24(a); Kincade v. Sparkman, 117 F.3d 949, 952 (6th Cir. 1997).

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Espinal v. Warden, Noble Correctional Institution

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division
May 1, 2007
Case Number: 1:05cv812 (S.D. Ohio May. 1, 2007)

rejecting claims challenging agreed-to sentence under plea bargain that was entered voluntarily and knowingly

Summary of this case from Canady v. Warden, Lebanon Correctional Institution

rejecting claims challenging agreed-to sentence under plea bargain that was entered voluntarily and knowingly

Summary of this case from Turner v. Warden, Noble Correctional Institution
Case details for

Espinal v. Warden, Noble Correctional Institution

Case Details

Full title:Pio German Espinal, Petitioner(s), v. Warden, Noble Correctional…

Court:United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division

Date published: May 1, 2007

Citations

Case Number: 1:05cv812 (S.D. Ohio May. 1, 2007)

Citing Cases

Walker v. Palmer

The right to appeal is a "positive right that must be affirmatively exercised," and therefore "a defendant…

Turner v. Warden, Noble Correctional Institution

As the Ohio Court of Appeals understood in denying petitioner's first delayed appeal motion ( see Doc. 11,…