Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00878/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00878-1/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

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANDREW ARLINGTON RING,

Petitioner,

v.

BRADON PRICE,

Respondent.

Case No. 1:19-cv-00878-AWI-EPG-HC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATION, DISMISSING

PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS 

CORPUS, DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT 

TO CLOSE CASE, AND DECLINING TO 

ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF 

APPEALABILITY

(ECF No. 8)

Petitioner, proceeding pro se, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant. On 

September 9, 2019, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendation recommending

the petition be dismissed without prejudice to refiling the claims in a civil rights action under 42 

U.S.C. § 1983 and the Americans with Disabilities Act. (ECF No. 8). This Findings and 

Recommendation was served on Petitioner and contained notice that any objections were to be 

filed within thirty (30) days of the date of service of that order. To date, Petitioner has filed no 

objections, and the time for doing so has passed.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted 

a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court concludes that 

the Findings and Recommendation is supported by the record and proper analysis, and there is no 

need to modify the Findings and Recommendation. 

Case 1:19-cv-00878-AWI-EPG Document 9 Filed 03/13/20 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

27

28

2

A petitioner seeking a writ of habeas corpus has no absolute entitlement to appeal a 

district court’s denial of his petition, and an appeal is only allowed in certain circumstances.

Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 335–36 (2003). The controlling statute in determining 

whether to issue a certificate of appealability provides as follows:

(a) In a habeas corpus proceeding or a proceeding under section 

2255 before a district judge, the final order shall be subject to 

review, on appeal, by the court of appeals for the circuit in which 

the proceeding is held.

(b) There shall be no right of appeal from a final order in a 

proceeding to test the validity of a warrant to remove to another

district or place for commitment or trial a person charged with a 

criminal offense against the United States, or to test the validity of 

such person’s detention pending removal proceedings.

(c) (1) Unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of 

appealability, an appeal may not be taken to the court of 

appeals from–

(A) the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding in which 

the detention complained of arises out of process issued by 

a State court; or

(B) the final order in a proceeding under section 2255.

(2) A certificate of appealability may issue under paragraph (1) 

only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the 

denial of a constitutional right.

(3) The certificate of appealability under paragraph (1) shall 

indicate which specific issue or issues satisfy the showing 

required by paragraph (2).

28 U.S.C. § 2253.

A court should issue a certificate of appealability if “reasonable jurists could debate 

whether (or, for that matter, agree that) 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, 484 (2000) (quoting Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 

880, 893 & n.4 (1983)). In the present case, reasonable jurists would not find the Court’s 

determination that Petitioner’s habeas petition should be dismissed debatable or wrong, or that 

Petitioner should be allowed to proceed further. Therefore, the Court declines to issue a 

certificate of appealability.

Case 1:19-cv-00878-AWI-EPG Document 9 Filed 03/13/20 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

27

28

3

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendation issued on September 9, 2019 (ECF No. 8) is 

ADOPTED IN FULL; 

2. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED without prejudice to refiling 

the claims in a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Americans with 

Disabilities Act;

3. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to CLOSE the case; and

4. The Court DECLINES to issue a certificate of appealability.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 13, 2020 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:19-cv-00878-AWI-EPG Document 9 Filed 03/13/20 Page 3 of 3