Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_10-cv-00375/USCOURTS-casd-3_10-cv-00375-0/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

- 1 - 10-CV-375-JM (JMA)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ISBIR A. ROGERS-WRIGHT,

Petitioner,

CASE NO. 10-CV-375-JM (JMA)

ORDER DECLINING TO ISSUE

CERTIFICATE OF

APPEALABILITY

v.

GEORGE NEOTTI, Warden,

Respondent.

On February 2, 2011, the court issued an order adopting the magistrate judge’s Report

& Recommendation in the above-entitled case and dismissed with prejudice Petitioner Isbir

A. Rogers-Wright’s petition for writ of habeas corpus. (Doc. No. 13.) Petitioner now files a

notice of appeal. (Doc. No. 15.) 

Under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”), an

appeal from a final order in a habeas corpus proceeding may not be taken“[u]nless a circuit

justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1). However, such

a certificate may only issue “if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of

a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). Because Petitioner has failed to make such a

showing, the court hereby DECLINES to issue a Certificate of Appealability as to all

cognizable federal claims presented in the petition for writ of habeas corpus. See Lambright

v. Stewart, 220 F.3d 1022, 1024-25 (9th Cir. 2000) (providing that threshold “substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right” is met by demonstrating that: (1) the issues are

debatable among jurists of reason; or (2) that a court could resolve the issues in a different

Case 3:10-cv-00375-JM-JMA Document 16 Filed 03/14/11 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 - 10-CV-375-JM (JMA)

manner; or (3) that the questions are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: March 14, 2011

 Hon. Jeffrey T. Miller

 United States District Judge

Case 3:10-cv-00375-JM-JMA Document 16 Filed 03/14/11 Page 2 of 2