Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-01442/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-01442-0/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 - 09cv1442

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARCOS EDUARDO MENDIOLA,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 09cv1442-MMA(AJB)

vs. ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S

APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE

OF APPEALABILITY

[Doc. No. 34]

JEANNE WOODFORD, Director of

Corrections, et al.,

Defendant.

Petitioner Marcos Eduardo Mendiola, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a petition for

writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 [Doc. No. 1] challenging his state court

convictions for first-degree murder with special circumstances and carjacking. Respondent filed an

answer to the first amended petition [Doc. No. 12], and Petitioner filed a traverse [Doc. No. 18]. 

Subsequent to transfer from the Central District of California, the matter was referred to United

States Magistrate Anthony J. Battaglia for preparation of a Report and Recommendation pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Civil Local Rule 72.3. On March 29, 2010, the undersigned adopted

the Report and Recommendation, denied the petition, and determined that a certificate of

appealability should not issue in this case. The Court concluded that Petitioner did not make a

substantial showing of a the denial of a constitutional right and that reasonable jurists would not

disagree. 28 U.S.C. § 2253; Fed. R. App. P. 22(b).

Currently before the Court is Petitioner’s application for a Certificate of Appealability,

Case 3:09-cv-01442-MMA-AJB Document 39 Filed 05/11/10 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

27

28

- 2 - 09cv1442

received and filed subsequent to the Court’s March 29, 2010 order declining to issue a certificate. 

Upon due consideration of Petitioner’s present application, the Court finds no reason to amend its

prior order. Therefore, for the reasons set forth in the Report and Recommendation and the Court’s

March 29, 2010 order, Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional

right. Accordingly, a certificate of appealability should not issue in this action and Petitioner’s

application is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: May 11, 2010

Hon. Michael M. Anello

United States District Judge

Case 3:09-cv-01442-MMA-AJB Document 39 Filed 05/11/10 Page 2 of 2