Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alnd-2_15-cv-01065/USCOURTS-alnd-2_15-cv-01065-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

KEVIN WAIDE PEOPLES,

Plaintiff,

v.

DEWAYNE ESTES, et al.

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil Action Number

 2:15-cv-01065-AKK-HGD

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On November 22, 2016, the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation 

was entered and the parties were allowed therein fourteen (14) days in which to file 

objections to the recommendations made by the magistrate judge. No party has 

filed objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. 

After careful consideration of the record in this case and the magistrate 

judge’s report and recommendation, the court hereby ADOPTS the report of the 

magistrate judge. The court further ACCEPTS the recommendations of the 

magistrate judge that the petition for writ of habeas corpus be denied. 

Pursuant to Rule 11 of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases, the Court has 

evaluated the claims within the petition for suitability for the issuance of a 

certificate of appealability (COA). See 28 U.S.C. § 2253. 

FILED

 2016 Dec-22 PM 02:08

U.S. DISTRICT COURT

N.D. OF ALABAMA

Case 2:15-cv-01065-AKK-HGD Document 9 Filed 12/22/16 Page 1 of 2
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), a COA may issue only when the 

petitioner “has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 

This showing can be established by demonstrating that “reasonable jurists could 

debate whether (or for that matter, agree that) the petition should have been 

resolved in a different manner” or that the issues were “adequate to deserve 

encouragement to proceed further.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000) 

(citing Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893 n.4 (1983)). For procedural rulings, a 

COA will issue only if reasonable jurists could “find it debatable” as to whether 

the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and whether 

the court’s procedural ruling was correct. Id.

The Court finds that reasonable jurists could not debate its resolution of the 

claims presented in this habeas corpus petition. For the reasons stated in the 

magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the court DECLINES to issue a 

COA with respect to any claims. 

A separate order in conformity with this Memorandum Opinion will be 

entered contemporaneously herewith.

DONE the 22nd day of December, 2016.

 

_________________________________

ABDUL K. KALLON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:15-cv-01065-AKK-HGD Document 9 Filed 12/22/16 Page 2 of 2