Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_98-cv-00114/USCOURTS-caed-2_98-cv-00114-4/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RANDY LANE KIDWELL, No. CIV S-98-0114 MCE PAN P 

Petitioner, 

v. ORDER

SUE L. HUBBARD, ET AL., 

Respondents. 

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has timely

filed a notice of appeal of this court's August 15, 2005, denial

of his application for a writ of habeas corpus. Before

petitioner can appeal this decision, a certificate of

appealability must issue. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P.

22(b).

///

///

///

///

Case 2:98-cv-00114-MCE -PAN Document 87 Filed 09/20/05 Page 1 of 3
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

2

Petitioner requests a certificate of appealability on the

following issues: (1) whether petitioner’s trial counsel rendered

ineffective assistance; and (2) whether the federal district

court erred in denying petitioner’s request, raised in his

objections to the February 2, 2005 findings and recommendations,

for an evidentiary hearing and discovery. A certificate of

appealability may issue under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 “only if the

applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). To obtain a

certificate of appealability, a petitioner must “demonstrat[e]

that 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 v. Cockrell, 537

U.S. 322, 327 (2003). The court must either issue a certificate

of appealability indicating which issues satisfy the required

showing or must state the reasons why such a certificate should

not issue. Fed. R. App. P. 22(b).

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

Case 2:98-cv-00114-MCE -PAN Document 87 Filed 09/20/05 Page 2 of 3
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

3

For the reasons set forth in the magistrate judge’s February

2, 2005, findings and recommendations, petitioner has not made a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right or

the need for an evidentiary hearing. Accordingly, a certificate

of appealability should not issue in this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: September 20, 2005 

________________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:98-cv-00114-MCE -PAN Document 87 Filed 09/20/05 Page 3 of 3