Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-01859/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-01859-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

---

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

Judgment

P:\PRO-SE\EJD\HC.14\01859Overton_deny-COA.wpd

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL L. OVERTON,

Petitioner,

 v.

WARDEN, et al., 

Respondents.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 14-01859 EJD (PR)

ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF

APPEALABILITY

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a petition for writ of habeas

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on April 23, 2014. Petitioner was granted several

opportunities to either pay the filing fee or file an In Forma Pauperis Application. 

When he failed to do so in the time provided, the Court dismissed the case without

prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee on September 24, 2014. (Docket No. 8.) 

Petitioner filed a notice of appeal. (Docket No. 10.) The Ninth Circuit has remanded

the case to this Court for the limited purpose of granting or denying a certificate of

appealability (COA). (Docket No. 13.) 

“Determining whether a COA should issue where the petition was dismissed on

procedural grounds has two components, one directed at the underlying constitutional

claims and one directed at the district court's procedural holding.” Slack v. McDaniel,

Case 5:14-cv-01859-EJD Document 14 Filed 02/09/15 Page 1 of 3
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

Judgment

P:\PRO-SE\EJD\HC.14\01859Overton_deny-COA.wpd 2

529 U.S. 473, 484-85 (2000). “When the district court denies a habeas petition on

procedural grounds without reaching the prisoner's underlying constitutional claim, a

COA should issue when the prisoner shows, at least, that jurists of reason would find it

debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right

and that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct

in its procedural ruling.” Id. at 484. As each of these components is a “threshold

inquiry,” the federal court “may find that it can dispose of the application in a fair and

prompt manner if it proceeds first to resolve the issue whose answer is more apparent

from the record and arguments.” Id. at 485. 

For the reasons discussed above, Petitioner has not shown that jurists of reason

would find it debatable whether the Court was correct in its procedural ruling that

Petitioner had failed to pay the filing fee. Accordingly, the COA is DENIED. 

The Clerk of the Court shall transmit a copy of this Order to the Ninth Circuit.

DATED: 

EDWARD J. DAVILA

United States District Judge

2/6/2015

Case 5:14-cv-01859-EJD Document 14 Filed 02/09/15 Page 2 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL L. OVERTON,

Petitioner,

 v.

WARDEN, et al.,

Respondents. /

Case Number: CV14-01859 EJD 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District

Court, Northern District of California.

That on , I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the

attached, by placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s)

hereinafter listed, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into

an inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

Michael L. Overton C-47370

California Men’s Colony

P. O. Box 8101

San Luis Obispo, CA 93409-8101

Dated: 

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: Elizabeth Garcia, Deputy Clerk

2/9/2015 2/9/2015 /s/

Case 5:14-cv-01859-EJD Document 14 Filed 02/09/15 Page 3 of 3