Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_92-cv-00483/USCOURTS-caed-2_92-cv-00483-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 535
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Death Penalty
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution

---

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

BRUCE WAYNE MORRIS,

Petitioner

v.

JILL BROWN, Warden, San

Quentin State Prison,

Respondent

_____________________________/

CIV. NO. S-92-0483 EJG/GGH P

DEATH PENALTY CASE

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

DENYING IN PART REQUEST FOR

CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding by counsel has filed

a notice of appeal from and a request for a certificate of

appealability of this court’s April 27, 2005 order adopting the

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations and denying his

Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus. 

Section 2253 of Title 28 of the United States Code provides

that “[a]n appeal may not be taken to the court of appeals from

the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding . . . unless a

circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.” 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A). Such certification may issue “only if

Case 2:92-cv-00483-EJG-GGH Document 357 Filed 05/27/05 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 applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253©)(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)(1).

Interpreting the predecessor to section 2253, the Supreme Court

held that a certificate of probable cause should issue when

petitioner has made a “‘substantial showing of the denial of [a]

federal right.’” Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893 (1983). 

To make that showing, petitioner must demonstrate that the issues

are debatable among jurists of reason, that a court could resolve

the issues in a different manner, or that the questions are

adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further. Id. n.4.

Petitioner has listed three issues in his request for a

certificate of appealability which he asserts meet the above

standard: 1) denial of Brady claim concerning the Roberts letter;

2) denial of Brady/Napue/Alcorta claim concerning the Marshall

memo; and 3) denial of motion to strike government’s reply to

petitioner’s objections to findings and recommendations. The

court agrees that the first two issues “are debatable among

jurists of reason” and, therefore, will issue a certificate of

appealability as to them. The third issue does not implicate a

constitutional right; accordingly, no certificate will issue as

to that issue.

///

Case 2:92-cv-00483-EJG-GGH Document 357 Filed 05/27/05 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

CONCLUSION

1. Petitioner’s May 21, 2005 request for a certificate of

appealability is GRANTED as to the first and second issues and

DENIED as to the third; and

2. A certificate of appealability will issue in accordance

with the terms of this order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 26, 2005

/s/ Edward J. Garcia 

_________________________________

EDWARD J. GARCIA, JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 2:92-cv-00483-EJG-GGH Document 357 Filed 05/27/05 Page 3 of 3