Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_10-cv-00653/USCOURTS-casd-3_10-cv-00653-2/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 - 10cv653

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RONALD REED DUMAS,

Petitioner,

CASE NO. 10cv653-LAB (WVG)

ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE

vs. OF APPEALABILITY

MATTHEW CATE,

Respondent.

On January 25, 2011, the Court issued an order denying Petitioner Ronald Dumas’

petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2254, finding the petition was timebarred and he was not entitled to tolling. Judgment was entered the next day. Dumas then

filed a notice of appeal.

In its order of January 25, the Court noted Dumas filed no opposition to Respondent’s

motion to dismiss, nor did he file objections to Magistrate Judge William Gallo’s report and

recommendation, which recommended denying the petition. As noted in that order, Dumas

allowed AEDPA’s one-year limitations period to expire before his mother contacted a lawyer

on his behalf to ask about filing a habeas petition. Even assuming the attorney’s handling

of Dumas’ petition was negligent and would otherwise have entitled Dumas to tolling, it made

no difference here. His petition was time-barred even before the attorney was contacted.

When, as here, the Court rejects a claim on procedural grounds, a petitioner can

obtain a certificate of appealability only on a showing that “jurists of reason would find it

Case 3:10-cv-00653-LAB-WVG Document 18 Filed 03/08/11 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 - 10cv653

debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and

that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its

procedural ruling.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Dumas has made no

showing of a denial of a constitutional right, and the Court finds jurists of reason would not

find the procedural ruling debatable. The certificate of appealability is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: March 8, 2011

HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS

United States District Judge

Case 3:10-cv-00653-LAB-WVG Document 18 Filed 03/08/11 Page 2 of 2