Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-06184/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-06184-4/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAMUEL D. HEARNES, JR., )

)

Petitioner, )

v. )

)

DAVID L. RUNNELS, Warden, )

)

Respondent. )

____________________________________)

CV F 02-6184 AWI SMS HC

ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE

OF APPEALABILITY

(Document #53)

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

habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On May 30, 2006, the court adopted the Magistrate

Judge’s Findings and Recommendations and denied the habeas corpus petition. The Clerk of the

Court entered judgment the same day. On July 6, 2006, Petitioner filed a notice of appeal and an

application for a certificate of appealability. 

A 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. Miller-El v.

Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 335-36 (2003). The controlling statute 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.

Case 1:02-cv-06184-AWI -SMS Document 54 Filed 07/31/06 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

27

28 2

 (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 the 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, 537 U.S. at 327; Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). 

While 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,

537 U.S. at 337-38. In the present case, the court finds that reasonable jurists would not

disagree with the court’s determination that Petitioner has failed to show that the state court’s

adjudication of Petitioner’s claims was contrary to clearly established federal law or

unreasonable. In light of the evidence against Petitioner, Reasonable jurists would not debate

the state court’s finding that any trial counsel errors did not prejudice Petitioner.

Accordingly, the court hereby ORDERS that Petitioner’s application for a certificate of

appealability is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 28, 2006 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:02-cv-06184-AWI -SMS Document 54 Filed 07/31/06 Page 2 of 2