From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Evans v. Horton

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
May 21, 2019
CASE NO. 2:19-CV-10284 (E.D. Mich. May. 21, 2019)

Opinion

CASE NO. 2:19-CV-10284

05-21-2019

THYRONE DESHAWN EVANS, #338014, Petitioner, v. CONNIE HORTON, Respondent.


OPINION & ORDER DISMISSING THE PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS , DENYING THE APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS & DENYING A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

Michigan prisoner Thyrone Deshawn Evans ("Petitioner") has submitted a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Petitioner's certificate of prisoner institutional/trust fund account activity states that he had a current spendable account balance of $166.05 in his prison account as of January 17, 2019 when an administrative officer of the Michigan Department of Corrections certified his financial statement. The Court concludes from the financial data that Petitioner has not established indigence and that he can pay the $5.00 filing fee for this action. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Petitioner's application to proceed in forma pauperis and DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE the petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The Court is required to dismiss the case because the allegation of poverty is untrue. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(A). Petitioner may submit a new habeas petition with payment of the filing fee in a new case. This case will not be reopened.

Before Petitioner may appeal, a certificate of appealability must issue. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(a); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). A certificate of appealability 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). When a court denies relief on the merits, the substantial showing threshold is met if the petitioner demonstrates that reasonable jurists would find the court's assessment of the constitutional claim debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85 (2000). When a court denies relief on procedural grounds, a certificate of appealability should issue if it is shown that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petitioner states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the court was correct in its procedural ruling. Id. Jurists of reason would not find the Court's procedural ruling debatable. Accordingly, the Court DENIES a certificate of appealability. This case is closed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Linda V. Parker

LINDA V. PARKER

U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: May 21, 2019 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record and/or pro se parties on this date, May 21, 2019, by electronic and/or U.S. First Class mail.

s/ R. Loury

Case Manager


Summaries of

Evans v. Horton

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
May 21, 2019
CASE NO. 2:19-CV-10284 (E.D. Mich. May. 21, 2019)
Case details for

Evans v. Horton

Case Details

Full title:THYRONE DESHAWN EVANS, #338014, Petitioner, v. CONNIE HORTON, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Date published: May 21, 2019

Citations

CASE NO. 2:19-CV-10284 (E.D. Mich. May. 21, 2019)