Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_10-cv-01215/USCOURTS-casd-3_10-cv-01215-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 540
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Mandamus and Other
Cause of Action: 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)

---

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

- 1 - 10cv1215

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 10cv1215-IEG(WMc)

(Related to 98cr88-IEG)

Order Denying Certificate 

of Appealability

vs.

GERARDO GONZALEZ and JOSE LUIS

VALENCIA-MENDOZA,

Defendants.

Defendants Gerardo Gonzalez and Jose Luis Valencia-Mendoza filed a petition for a writ

of audita querela, to obtain review of their sentence in light of subsequent amendments to the

Federal Sentencing Guidelines. The Court denied the petition by order filed June 30, 2010,

explaining the writ was not an available remedy. Thereafter, Defendants filed identical motions

seeking to vacate judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 36 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). By order

filed October 4, 2010, the Court denied their request for relief. Defendants appealed. The Ninth

Circuit Court of Appeals has remanded the case for issuance of a certificate of appealability.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, Defendants may only proceed on appeal if they “ha[ve]

made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” Where, as here, the motion was

denied on procedural grounds, a certificate of appealability should be granted only where jurists of

reason would find both the underlying constitutional claim and the Court’s procedural ruling

“debatable.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Here, Defendants sought a writ of

Case 3:10-cv-01215-IEG-WMC Document 16 Filed 12/21/10 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

27

28

- 2 - 10cv1215

audita querela as a method to obtain downward modification of their sentence. However, the writ

is not available under such circumstances where the applicable sentencing range has been lowered

by the Sentencing Commission subsequent to imposition of sentence. Carrington v. United States,

503 F.3d 888, 890 (9th Cir. 2007). Defendants raised no issue in their motions for relief from

judgment justifying further review. Defendants do not make a substantial showing of the denial of

a constitutional right, and the issues raised by the petition are not “debatable.” The Court DENIES

a certificate of appealability.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: December 21, 2010

IRMA E. GONZALEZ, Chief Judge

United States District Court

Case 3:10-cv-01215-IEG-WMC Document 16 Filed 12/21/10 Page 2 of 2