UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
July 30, 2012
ROSS ALLEN WARDLAW, PETITIONER,
C. M. HARRISON, WARDEN, RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Alex Kozinski Chief Circuit Judge Sitting by designation
Wardlaw's habeas petition is dismissed. 28 U.S.C. § 2254 r. 4. His "[c]onclusory allegations which are not supported by a statement of specific facts do not warrant habeas relief." James v. Borg, 24 F.3d 20, 26 (9th Cir. 1994).
The dismissal is with prejudice because Wardlaw has had ample opportunity to mend the deficiencies in his petition. Vess v. Ciba-Geigy Corp. USA, 317 F.3d 1097, 1108 (9th Cir. 2003). He twice attempted to submit amended petitions that did not comply with local rules. The court then gave Wardlaw an opportunity to submit a compliant amended petition by April 17, 2012, but he failed to do so.
Because Wardlaw has not made a substantial showing that he was denied a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not issue. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003).
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.