Case No. 2:17-cv-02043-PKH-MEF.

JOE McKINLEY JONES, JR., Plaintiff, v. WENDY KELLEY, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction, Defendant.

United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Fort Smith Division.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Cause: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Nature of Suit: 530 Habeas Corpus (General)
Source: PACER

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Joe McKinley Jones, Jr., Plaintiff, Pro Se.

Wendy Kelley, Defendant, represented by Ashley Argo Priest , Arkansas Attorney General's Office.


MARK E. FORD, Magistrate Judge.

By Order entered May 5, 2017 (Doc. 14), the Court adopted the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. 12), and it denied and dismissed the Defendant's 28 U.S.C. § 2254 motion. The undersigned has been referred Defendant's Motion for Leave to Appeal In Forma Pauperis. (Doc. 18)

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." A "substantial showing" is a showing that "issues are debatable among reasonable jurists, a court could resolve the issues differently, or the issues deserve further proceedings." Cox v. Norris, 133 F.3d 565, 569 (8th Cir. 1997), cert. denied, 525 U.S. 834 (1998). In its Order entered on May 5, 2017, the Court found that Defendant had failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, and it ruled that no certificate of appealability shall issue. (Doc. 14, p. 1)

Accordingly, I recommend that Defendant's Motion for Leave to Appeal In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 18) be DENIED.

The parties have fourteen (14) days from receipt of the report and recommendation in which to file written objections pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The failure to file timely objections may result in waiver of the right to appeal questions of fact. The parties are reminded that objections must be both timely and specific to trigger de novo review by the district court.


1000 Characters Remaining reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases