Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_98-cv-06047/USCOURTS-caed-1_98-cv-06047-2/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

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHNNEY RAMEY, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

GAIL LEWIS, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:98-CV-06047 OWW SMS HC

Appeal No. 10-15568

ORDER DECLINING ISSUANCE OF

CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT

TO SERVE COPY OF ORDER ON NINTH

CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS

On September 4, 2003, the undersigned issued an order dismissing Petitioner’s federal

habeas petition as untimely under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d) and denying a certificate of appealability.

Judgment was entered the next day and Petitioner appealed to the Ninth Circuit. On September 6,

2006, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the decision of this Court.

Three years later, on July 7, 2009, Petitioner filed a motion for rehearing in the Ninth Circuit.

The motion was denied as untimely. On July 22, 2009, Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration

of this Court’s order dismissing the petition. That motion also was denied as untimely. 

On February 10, 2010, Petitioner filed a pleading in this Court in which Petitioner again

requested relief from judgment pursuant to Rule 60(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Petitioner was informed that his request had already been considered and his motion was denied.

Petitioner filed a notice of appeal on February 18, 2010. On May 26, 2010, the Ninth Circuit issued

the instant order remanding the matter to this Court to issue or decline to issue a certificate of

U.S. District Court

E. D. California cd 1

Case 1:98-cv-06047-OWW -SMS Document 102 Filed 06/02/10 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

appealability. 

A state prisoner 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. MillerEl v. Cockrell, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 1039 (2003). The controlling statute in determining whether to issue

a certificate of appealability is 28 U.S.C. § 2253, which 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).

If a court denies a petitioner’s petition, the court may only issue a certificate of appealability

“if jurists of reason could disagree with the district court’s resolution of his constitutional claims or

that jurists could conclude the issues presented are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed

further.” Miller-El, 123 S.Ct. at 1034; Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). While the

petitioner is not required to prove the merits of his case, he must demonstrate “something more than

the absence of frivolity or the existence of mere good faith on his . . . part.” Miller-El, 123 S.Ct. at

1040.

In the present case, the Court finds that reasonable jurists would not find the Court’s

determination that Petitioner is not entitled to federal habeas corpus relief debatable, wrong, or

deserving of encouragement to proceed further. Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration is untimely

and his arguments were already considered in a previous motion for reconsideration as well as the

U.S. District Court

E. D. California cd 2

Case 1:98-cv-06047-OWW -SMS Document 102 Filed 06/02/10 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

final order dismissing the petition. Accordingly, the Court hereby DECLINES to issue a certificate

of appealability. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to serve a copy of this Order on the Ninth Circuit

Court of Appeals. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 2, 2010 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

U.S. District Court

E. D. California cd 3

Case 1:98-cv-06047-OWW -SMS Document 102 Filed 06/02/10 Page 3 of 3