Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_01-cv-02218/USCOURTS-caed-2_01-cv-02218-3/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

 Petitioner’s appeal is timely pursuant to rules 4(a)(2) and 4(c)(1) of the Federal Rules

of Appellate Procedure.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

APRIL GRAYSON,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-01-2218 LKK JFM P

vs.

GWENDOLYN MITCHELL, et al., 

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has timely filed a notice of appeal of

this court's March 13, 2006, denial of her application for a writ of habeas corpus. Before

petitioner can appeal this decision, a certificate of appealability must issue. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c);

Fed. R. App. P. 22(b).1

A certificate of appealability may issue under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 “only if the

applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2). The certificate of appealability must “indicate which specific issue or issues

satisfy” the requirement. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(3). A certificate of appealability should be

granted for any issue that petitioner can demonstrate is “‘debatable among jurists of reason,’”

Case 2:01-cv-02218-LKK -JFM Document 37 Filed 05/31/06 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

 Except for the requirement that appealable issues be specifically identified, the

standard for issuance of a certificate of appealability is the same as the standard that applied to

issuance of a certificate of probable cause. Jennings, at 1010.

2

could be resolved differently by a different court, or is “‘adequate to deserve encouragement to

proceed further.’” Jennings v. Woodford, 290 F.3d 1006, 1010 (9th Cir. 2002) (quoting Barefoot

v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893 (1983)).2

Petitioner has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right in

the following issues presented in the instant petition: (1) whether there was insufficient evidence

to support petitioner’s conviction of bringing an explosive into jail and procuring for purposes of

prostitution; (2) whether the trial court erred in failing to give a unanimity jury instruction on

kidnapping and the firearm use enhancements and in failing to give a jury instruction on the

lesser included offense of contributing to the delinquency of a minor; (3) whether the trial court

erred in admitting evidence that was unduly prejudicial; (4) whether the trial court erred in

failing to hold a Marsden hearing; and (5) whether petitioner was improperly convicted of

several lesser included offenses.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is

issued in the present action.

DATED: May 31, 2006.

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

/gray2218.coa

Case 2:01-cv-02218-LKK -JFM Document 37 Filed 05/31/06 Page 2 of 2