Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00513/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00513-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

 Petitioner also asks that the court reconsider the denial of petitioner’s June 4, 2004

motion for summary judgment and petitioner’s June 14, 2004 motion for injunctive relief.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL STEPHEN MATLOCK,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-03-0513 LKK KJM P 

vs.

MIKE KNOWLES, et al.,

Respondents. ORDER

 /

On April 12, 2005, petitioner filed a motion asking that this court reconsider,

among other things, the court’s March 31, 2005 dismissal of petitioner’s application for writ of

habeas corpus as time-barred.1

A district court may reconsider a ruling under either Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 59(e) or 60(b). See Sch. Dist. Number. 1J, Multnomah County v. ACandS, Inc., 5

F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993). “Reconsideration is appropriate if the district court (1) is

presented with newly discovered evidence, (2) committed clear error or the initial decision was

manifestly unjust, or (3) if there is an intervening change in controlling law.” Id. at 1263.

/////

Case 2:03-cv-00513-LKK -KJM Document 38 Filed 05/13/05 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

Petitioner fails to present anything justifying reconsideration of the dismissal of

this matter as time-barred. Accordingly, petitioner’s April 12, 2005 motion for reconsideration

will be denied in its entirety.

Petitioner has filed a notice of appeal of this court's March 31, 2005 dismissal. 

Before petitioner can appeal this decision, a certificate of appealability must issue. 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b).

A certificate of appealability may issue under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 “only if the

applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2). When a district court denies a habeas petition on procedural grounds without

reaching the prisoner's underlying constitutional claim, a certificate of appealability should issue

when the prisoner shows 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, 529

U.S. 473, 484-85 (2000). The certificate of appealability must “indicate which specific issue or

issues satisfy” the above requirements. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(3).

For the reasons set forth in the magistrate judge’s February 1, 2005 findings and

recommendations, jurists of reason would not find it debatable whether petitioner’s application

was properly dismissed. Accordingly, a certificate of appealability will not issue in this action.

Finally, petitioner seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. Good

cause appearing, petitioner’s request will be granted.

/////

/////

/////

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:03-cv-00513-LKK -KJM Document 38 Filed 05/13/05 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

3

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner’s April 12, 2005 motion for reconsideration is denied;

2. Petitioner’s April 12, 2005 request for a certificate of appealability is denied;

and

3. Petitioner’s request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is granted.

DATED: May 12, 2005

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

matl0513.830

Case 2:03-cv-00513-LKK -KJM Document 38 Filed 05/13/05 Page 3 of 3