Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00460/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00460-3/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

FRANK VALENZUELA, JR., No. CIV S-04-0460 MCE JFM P

Petitioner, 

v. ORDER

SCOTT KERNAN, WARDEN, ET AL., 

Respondents. 

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has timely

filed a notice of appeal of this court’s September 7, 2005

dismissal of his application for a writ of habeas corpus as

barred by the statute of limitations. 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). 

///

Case 2:04-cv-00460-MCE -JFM Document 14 Filed 10/17/05 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

The court must either issue a certificate of appealability

indicating which issues satisfy the required showing or must

state the reasons why such a certificate should not issue. Fed.

R. App. P. 22(b).

Where, as here, the petition was dismissed on procedural

grounds, a certificate of appealability “should issue if the

prisoner can show: (1) ‘that jurists of reason would find it

debatable whether the district court was correct in its

procedural ruling’; and (2) ‘that jurists of reason would find it

debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial

of a constitutional right.’” Morris v. Woodford, 229 F.3d 775,

780 (9th Cir. 2000) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 120

S.Ct. 1595, 1604 (2000)).

After careful review of the entire record herein, this court

finds that petitioner has not satisfied the first requirement for

issuance of a certificate of appealability in this case.

Specifically, there is no showing that jurists of reason would

find it debatable whether this action is barred by the statute of

limitations. Accordingly, a certificate of appealability should

not issue in this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: October 14, 2005

_____________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-00460-MCE -JFM Document 14 Filed 10/17/05 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

Case 2:04-cv-00460-MCE -JFM Document 14 Filed 10/17/05 Page 3 of 3