From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Moore v. Smith

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Mar 2, 2012
CASE NO. 5:11-cv-14319 (E.D. Mich. Mar. 2, 2012)

Opinion

CASE NO. 5:11-cv-14319

03-02-2012

LEONARR T. MOORE, Petitioner, v. WILLIE O. SMITH, Respondent.


HONORABLE JOHN CORBETT O'MEARA


ORDER DENYING PETITIONER'S MOTION

FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

AND APPLICATION TO PROCEED

IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON APPEAL

Petitioner Leonarr T. Moore has appealed the Court's order dismissing his habeas corpus petition. Currently pending before this Court are Petitioner's motion for a certificate of appealability and his application to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.

"[A] prisoner seeking post-conviction relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 has no automatic right to appeal a district court's denial or dismissal of the petition. Instead, [the] petitioner must first seek and obtain a [certificate of appealability.]" Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 327 (2003). 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).

Petitioner alleged in his habeas petition that he was convicted on the basis of evidence obtained through an unconstitutional search and seizure. The Court summarily dismissed the petition because Fourth Amendment claims are not cognizable on habeas corpus review if the petitioner had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the claim in state court. Stone v. Powell, 428 U.S. 465, 482 (1976). Petitioner had a full and fair opportunity to raise his claim in the trial court, in the Michigan Court of Appeals, and in the Michigan Supreme Court. Consequently, reasonable jurists would not "find it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right" or whether this Court's procedural ruling was correct. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).

Petitioner's motion for a certificate of appealability [dkt. #5] is DENIED. The application to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal [dkt. #8] likewise is DENIED, as an appeal could not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).

John Corbett O'Meara

United States District Judge

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon Petitioner on this date, March 2, 2012, by first-class U.S. mail.

William Barkholz

Case Manager


Summaries of

Moore v. Smith

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Mar 2, 2012
CASE NO. 5:11-cv-14319 (E.D. Mich. Mar. 2, 2012)
Case details for

Moore v. Smith

Case Details

Full title:LEONARR T. MOORE, Petitioner, v. WILLIE O. SMITH, Respondent.

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

Date published: Mar 2, 2012

Citations

CASE NO. 5:11-cv-14319 (E.D. Mich. Mar. 2, 2012)