Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-01203/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-01203-2/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DANIEL LUCAS,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-08-1203 LKK DAD P

vs.

STEVE MOORE, et al.,

Respondent. ORDER

 /

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for a writ of habeas

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On April 26, 2010, judgment was entered in this court

denying the petition. On June 2, 2010, pursuant to the “mailbox rule,” petitioner filed a notice of

appeal. On June 29, 2010, petitioner filed a motion to appoint counsel, a motion for certificate of

appealability, and a motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. Before petitioner can appeal

this decision, a certificate of appealability must issue. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R .App. P.

22(b). 

The timely filing of a notice of appeal is a jurisdictional requirement. Scott v.

Younger, 739 F.2d 1464, 1466 (9th Cir. 1984). Here, the time limit for filing a notice of appeal

following entry of judgment is thirty days. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a). Petitioner's notice of appeal

in this action was filed more than thirty days after entry of judgment. 

Case 2:08-cv-01203-LKK -DAD Document 24 Filed 07/29/10 Page 1 of 2
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 United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has held that the

issuance of a certificate of probable cause cannot vest the court of appeals with jurisdiction if

jurisdiction is not proper in that court. Hayward v. Britt, 572 F.2d 1324, 1325 (9th Cir. 1978). 

The rationale of Hayward applies with equal force to a certificate of appealability. For these

reasons, the court declines to issue a certificate of appealability.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner’s June 29, 2010 motion for certificate of appealability is denied;

2. Petitioner’s June 29, 2010 motion to proceed in forma pauperis is denied; and

3. Petitioner’s June 29, 2010 motion for the appointment of counsel on appeal is

denied.

DATED: July 28, 2010.

Case 2:08-cv-01203-LKK -DAD Document 24 Filed 07/29/10 Page 2 of 2