Goods v. Daley
| Terrill Goods, Sr. |
| James A. Daley |
| 2:2023cv00063 |
| May 10, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky |
| Hanly A Ingram |
| Gregory F VanTatenhove |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 29, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 JUDGMENT: 1. Terrill Goods's petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254 [R. #1 ] is DENIED. Judgment is entered in favor of the Respondent with respect to allissues raised in this proceeding.2. This action is DISMISSED and |
Filing 5
ORDER: 1. The Report and Recommendation [R. #4 ] is ADOPTED as and for the opinion of theCourt;2. Pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, Petitioner Terrill Goods'sPetition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [R. #4 ] is DISMISSED upon initial review;3. A Certificate of Appealability is DENIED as to all issues raised; and4. Judgment in this matter will follow promptly. Signed by Judge Gregory F. VanTatenhove on 6/29/2023.(ECO)cc: COR and Terrill Goods, Sr. by US Mail
|
| ***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Gregory F. VanTatenhove for review: re #4 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Terrill Goods, Sr. (ECO) |
| Filing 4 RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION: The undersigned therefore RECOMMENDS that Goods's habeas petition be DISMISSED upon initial review. The undersigned further RECOMMENDS that no Certificate of Appealability issue. Under 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2), a certificate of appealability may issue "only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." See also Rule 11 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 proceedings. When a case is dismissed on procedural grounds, a Certificate may only issue if the movant can show 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, the record is clear that Goods's claim is untimely and unexhausted. No reasonable jurist would find the assessments on the merits above to be wrong or debatable; thus, no Certificate of Appealability should issue. Any objection to, or argument against, denial of the 2254 motion must be asserted properly and in response to this Recommended Disposition. The Court directs the parties to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1) for appeal rights and mechanics concerning this Recommended Disposition, issued under subsection (B) of the statute. See also Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings, Rule 8(b). Within fourteen days after being served with a copy of this decision, any party may serve and file specific written objections to any or all findings or recommendations fordetermination, de novo, by the District Judge. Failure to make a timely objection consistent with the statute and rule may, and normally will, result in waiver of further appeal to or review by the District Court and Court of Appeals. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 155 (1985); United States v. Wandahsega, 924 F.3d 868, 878 (6th Cir. 2019). Signed by Magistrate Judge Hanly A. Ingram on 5/17/2023.(ECO)cc: COR and Terrill Goods, Sr. by US Mail |
| Filing 3 IMPORTANT NOTICE to Pro Se Filer: Information relating to pro se filings and F.R.Civ.P. 5.2 requiring personal identifiers be partially redacted from documents filed with the court. #Click here for more information on the rules. It is the sole responsibility of counsel and the parties to comply with the rules requiring redaction of personal data identifiers.cc: pro se filer via U.S. Mail (Attachments: #1 Sample Caption Page)(ECO) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by Terrill Goods, Sr., Pro Se. (ECO) |
| ***FILE SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Hanly A. Ingram for review: #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECO) |
| Conflict Check run. (ECO) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Kentucky Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Goods v. Daley | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Terrill Goods, Sr. | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent: James A. Daley | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
