Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-01465/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-01465-4/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)

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

For the Northern District of California

NOT FOR CITATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ABELARDO VELA, JR.,

Petitioner, No. C 05-1465 PJH

ORDER GRANTING CERTIFICATE

OF APPEALABILITY

v.

MIKE KNOWLES, Warden,

Respondent.

_______________________________/

This is a habeas case filed by a state prisoner under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On

February 21, 2006, this court denied Vela’s petition on the merits. On March 20, 2006,

Vela filed a notice of appeal.

To obtain a certificate of appealability, Vela must make “a substantial showing of the

denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). “Where a district court has

rejected the constitutional claims on the merits, the showing required to satisfy § 2253(c) is

straightforward: The petitioner must demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the

district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong.” Slack v.

McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Section 2253(c)(3) requires a court granting a

COA to indicate which specific issue or issues satisfy the COA standard.

This court finds that the issue raised by Vela – whether his counsel’s failure to file a

motion to suppress constituted ineffective assistance of counsel – meets the 

Case 4:05-cv-01465-PJH Document 17 Filed 03/21/06 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

above standard and accordingly GRANTS the COA as to that issue. See generally MillerEl v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322 (2003). 

Accordingly, the clerk shall forward the file, including a copy of this order, to the

Court of Appeals. See Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); United States v. Asrar, 116 F.3d 1268, 1270

(9th Cir. 1997).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 21, 2006 ______________________________

PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

United States District Judge

Case 4:05-cv-01465-PJH Document 17 Filed 03/21/06 Page 2 of 2