Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-06405/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-06405-1/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)

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT JOHN CRUZ,

Petitioner,

 v.

ROSEANNE CAMPBELL, Warden,

Respondent. /

No. C06-6405 MJJ

ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S

APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF

APPEALABILITY

Before the Court is Petitioner Robert John Cruz’s Application for a Certificate of

Appealability (“COA”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253. 

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, a Petitioner is required to obtain a COA from the district court

prior to filing an appeal. A court may issue a COA when “the applicant has made a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). The “substantial showing”

may be satisfied where the petitioner demonstrates “that reasonable jurists could debate whether . . .

the petition should have been resolved in a different manner or that the issues presented were

‘adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.’” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483-84

(quoting Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893-94 (1983)). 

In the instant case, Petitioner contends that a COA should issue as to each of the two issues

presented in the habeas petition: (1) whether Petitioner was deprived of his due process rights when

Case 3:06-cv-06405-MJJ Document 21 Filed 04/04/08 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

27

28

2

the state court trial judge failed to consider Petitioner's background, character, and prospects when

considering Petitioner's request for Romero relief; and (2) whether the prison term of 25 years to life,

imposed under California's Three Strikes Law, violated the Eighth Amendment proscription against

cruel and unusual punishment, as applied to Petitioner. Upon review, the Court finds that Petitioner

has met the requirements for obtaining a COA and GRANTS Petitioner’s request as to both issues. 

The Clerk shall forward this order along with the case file to the United States Court of

Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. See United States v. Asrar, 116 F.3d 1268, 1270 (9th Cir. 1997). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 3, 2008 

MARTIN J. JENKINS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-06405-MJJ Document 21 Filed 04/04/08 Page 2 of 2