Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02004/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02004-7/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WALLACE ERVIN,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-05-2004 DFL DAD P

vs.

JOHN MARSHALL, Warden, et al., 

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has

filed a timely notice of appeal of this court's September 29,

2006 dismissal of his application for a writ of habeas corpus as

time-barred. 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) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). Given

recent developments concerning California’s application of the

“substantial delay” rule for determining timeliness, see King v.

Case 2:05-cv-02004-DFL-DAD Document 26 Filed 06/22/07 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

2

Lamarque, 464 F.3d 963, 966-68 (9th Cir. 2006), the issue of

whether petitioner is entitled to statutory tolling under 28

U.S.C. § 2244(d)(2) is “debatable among jurists of reason,”

Jennings, 290 F.3d at 1010. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a certificate of

appealability is issued in the present action.

DATED: June 22, 2007

/s/ David F. Levi 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

/erv2004.830

Case 2:05-cv-02004-DFL-DAD Document 26 Filed 06/22/07 Page 2 of 2