Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00164/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00164-2/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

 Petitioner’s September 13, 2007 notice of appeal was filed after the Magistrate Judge’s

1

findings and recommendations were issued, but before final judgment was entered. However,

pursuant to Rule 4(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, the notice of appeal is

deemed timely filed.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DANNY RAVIART,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-03-0164 MCE EFB P

vs.

JAMES YATES, Warden, ORDER

Respondent.

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has timely filed a notice of appeal of

this court's September 28, 2007 denial of his application for a writ of habeas corpus. Before 1

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). The certificate of appealability must “indicate which specific issue or issues

satisfy” the requirement. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(3).

Case 2:03-cv-00164-MCE -EFB Document 25 Filed 10/15/07 Page 1 of 2
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

 Except for the requirement that appealable issues be specifically identified, the standard 2

for issuance of a certificate of appealability is the same as the standard that applied to issuance of

a certificate of probable cause. Jennings, at 1010.

2

A certificate of appealability should be granted for any issue that petitioner can

demonstrate is “‘debatable among jurists of reason,’” could be resolved differently by a different

court, or is “‘adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.’” Jennings v. Woodford,

290 F.3d 1006, 1010 (9th Cir. 2002) (quoting Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893 (1983)).

2

Petitioner has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right in

the following issues presented in the instant petition: (1) whether sufficient evidence supported

his conviction on the charge of assault with a firearm; (2) whether instructional error violated his

right to due process; and (3) whether his right to due process was violated when the trial court

engaged in improper questioning of witnesses. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is

issued in the present action.

Dated: October 12, 2007

________________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:03-cv-00164-MCE -EFB Document 25 Filed 10/15/07 Page 2 of 2