From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Peak v. U.S.

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Apr 21, 2011
CIVIL ACTION NO. 05-cr-510, NO. 10-cv-3368 (E.D. Pa. Apr. 21, 2011)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 05-cr-510, NO. 10-cv-3368.

April 21, 2011


ORDER


AND NOW, this 19th day of April, 2011, it is hereby ORDERED:

1. Petitioner's motion to vacate/set aside/correct sentence, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, (doc. no. 72) is DENIED;
2. Petitioner's petition will be DISMISSED;
3. A certificate of appealability shall not issue;
4. This case shall be marked CLOSED.

A prisoner seeking a writ of habeas corpus has no absolute entitlement to appeal a district court's denial of his petition. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1). Rather, a district court must first issue a certificate of appealability ("COA"). Id. "A [COA] may issue . . . only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." Id. § 2253(c)(2). To make such a showing, "`petitioner must demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong,'" Tennard v. Dretke, 542 U.S. 274, 282 (2004) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)), or that "the issues presented were `adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further,'"Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003) (quoting Slack, 529 U.S. at 484). Petitioner has not made the requisite showing in this case.

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Peak v. U.S.

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Apr 21, 2011
CIVIL ACTION NO. 05-cr-510, NO. 10-cv-3368 (E.D. Pa. Apr. 21, 2011)
Case details for

Peak v. U.S.

Case Details

Full title:HASKELL PEAK, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Apr 21, 2011

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 05-cr-510, NO. 10-cv-3368 (E.D. Pa. Apr. 21, 2011)