IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA JONATHAN SMITH, : Civil No. 1:24-CV-01608 : Petitioner, : : v. : : THE PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF : PAROLE, et al., : : Respondents. : Judge Jennifer P. Wilson MEMORANDUM On November 29, 2024, the court entered an order dismissing the Section 2254 petition in the above captioned matter. (Doc. 4.) That order did not address the certificate of appealability (“COA”) as required under Rule 11 of the Rules Governing 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts. Therefore, the court now takes this opportunity to consider a COA and declines to issue a COA in this matter. CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY Pursuant to

(c), unless a circuit justice or judge issues a COA, an appeal may not be taken from a final order in a proceeding under

. A COA may issue only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.

(c)(2). “A petitioner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that jurists of reason could disagree with the district court’s resolution of his constitutional claims or that jurists could conclude the issues presented are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.” Miller-El v. Cockrell,

(2003). “When the

district court denies a habeas petition on procedural grounds without reaching the prisoner’s underlying constitutional claim, a COA should issue when the prisoner shows, at least, 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,

(2000). Here, jurists of reason would not conclude that the issues presented are adequate to deserve

encouragement to proceed further. Accordingly, no COA will be issued. An appropriate order follows. s/Jennifer P. Wilson JENNIFER P. WILSON United States District Judge Middle District of Pennsylvania

Date: January 16, 2025