IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA AUGUSTA DIVISION QUINT L. EVANS, ) Petitioner, ) v. CV 119-221 RICHARD ROUNDTREE, Sheriff, Respondent.

ORDER

After a careful, de novo review of the file, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, to which objections have been filed. (Doc. no. 10.) The Magistrate Judge recommended dismissing the petition without prejudice because Petitioner has not exhausted his state court remedies and this federal court should not interfere with an ongoing state prosecution. (See doc. no. 5.) Petitioner provides no new information warranting rejection of any portion of the Magistrate Judge’s analysis. Accordingly, the Court OVERRULES all objections, ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as its opinion, and DISMISSES this petition filed pursuant to

without prejudice. Further, a state prisoner seeking relief under § 2241 must obtain a certificate of appealability (“COA”) before appealing the denial of his application for a writ of habeas corpus. See Sawyer v. Holder,

, 1364 n.3 (11th Cir. 2003) (“[S]tate prisoners proceeding under § 2241 must obtain a COA to appeal.”) This Court should grant a COA

only if the prisoner makes a “substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”

(c)(2). For the reasons set forth in the Report and Recommendation, and in consideration of the standards enunciated in Slack v. McDaniel,

(2000), Petitioner has failed to make the requisite showing. Accordingly, the Court DENIES

a COA in this case. Moreover, because there are no non-frivolous issues to raise on appeal, an appeal would not be taken in good faith, and Petitioner is not entitled to appeal in forma pauperis. See

(a)(3). Upon the foregoing, the Court CLOSES this civil action. SO ORDERED this [4% of February, 2020, at Augusta, Georgia.

(J. ight Cs GE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA