Opinion

Smith v. The Pennsylvania Board of Parole

Court
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Filed
Jan 16, 2025
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 33.7%

The opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

JONATHAN SMITH, : Civil No. 1:24-CV-01608

:

Petitioner, :

:

v. :

:

THE PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF :

PAROLE, et al., :

:

Respondents. : Judge Jennifer P. Wilson

MEMORANDUM

On November 29, 2024, the court entered an order dismissing the Section

2254 petition in the above captioned matter. (Doc. 4.) That order did not address

the certificate of appealability (“COA”) as required under Rule 11 of the Rules

Governing 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts. Therefore, the court

now takes this opportunity to consider a COA and declines to issue a COA in this

matter.

CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c), unless a circuit justice or judge issues a

COA, an appeal may not be taken from a final order in a proceeding under 28

U.S.C. § 2254. A COA may issue only if the applicant has made a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). “A

petitioner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that jurists of reason could

disagree with the district court’s resolution of his constitutional claims or that

jurists could conclude the issues presented are adequate to deserve encouragement

to proceed further.” Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 327 (2003). “When the

district court denies a habeas petition on procedural grounds without reaching the

prisoner’s underlying constitutional claim, a COA 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). Here, jurists of reason

would not conclude that the issues presented are adequate to deserve

encouragement to proceed further. Accordingly, no COA will be issued.

An appropriate order follows.

s/Jennifer P. Wilson

JENNIFER P. WILSON

United States District Judge

Middle District of Pennsylvania

Date: January 16, 2025

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.