IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI ABERDEEN DIVISION CHARLES SMITH, JR. PETITIONER v. No. 1:17CV184-GHD-DAS MR. RONALD KING, ET AL. RESPONDENTS Consolidated With CHARLES SMITH, JR. PETITIONER v. No. 1:19CV117-GHD-DAS RONALD KING, ET AL. RESPONDENTS

CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY The court has entered a final judgment in a habeas corpus proceeding in which the detention complained of arises out of process issued by a state court under

, and the court, considering the record in the case and the requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 22(b) and

(c), finds that, for the reasons stated in its opinion, the Petitioner has failed to “demonstrate that the issues are debatable among jurists of reason; that a court could resolve issues in a different manner; or that the questions are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.” Barefoot v. Estelle,

, 893 n.4,

, 3394 n.4,

(1993) (superseded by statute) (citations and quotations omitted);

(c) (1) and (2). Specifically, the court finds, for the reasons set forth in its memorandum opinion and final judgment, that the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus should be denied. Sy SO ORDERED, this, the 2 / day of September, 2021.

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE