[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FILED
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
JANUARY 6, 2010
No. 09-11763 JOHN P. LEY
Non-Argument Calendar ACTING CLERK
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 06-00056-CV-J-32-MCR
ADAM JEROME DURR,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
FLORIDA ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondents-Appellees.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
_________________________
(January 6, 2010)
Before BARKETT, HULL and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Adam Durr appeals pro se the denial of his petition for a writ of habeas
corpus. 28 U.S.C. § 2254. We granted a certificate of appealability to resolve
whether the district court, contrary to Clisby v. Jones, 960 F.2d 925, 936 (11th Cir.
1992) (en banc), failed to address Durr’s argument that “counsel was ineffective
for failing to file a motion to suppress evidence seized pursuant to an unreasonable
search.” In his initial brief, Durr argues the merits of counsel’s ineffectiveness, but
we will not address that issue because it is outside the scope of the certificate of
appealability. Rhode v. United States, 583 F.3d 1289, 1291 (11th Cir. 2009). We
agree with the Secretary of the Department of Corrections that the record
establishes that the district court complied with Clisby and addressed the claim of
ineffective assistance alleged in Durr’s petition. We affirm the denial of Durr’s
petition.
AFFIRMED.
2