Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-01469/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-01469-2/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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Everardo Lopez, Jr.,

 Petitioner,

vs.

Charles L. Ryan, et al.,

 Respondents.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-08-1469-PHX-PGR

 

 ORDER

 

On October 14, 2009, the Court entered a Judgment (Doc. 19) that denied

and dismissed with prejudice the petitioner’s Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for

a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody. On October 1, 2010, the

petitioner filed a Notice of Appeal to Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals From Order of

United States District Court and Waiver of Time to File (Doc. 20), wherein he

requests that he be granted a waiver of the time to file a notice of appeal

pursuant to Fed.R.App.P. 4, that he be issued a certificate of appealability

pursuant to Fed.R.App. 22(b), and that he be allowed to appeal in forma

pauperis. The Court cannot grant any of the petitioner’s requests.

First, the Court cannot at this late date grant the petitioner the extension of

time to file an appeal. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2107(a) and Fed.R.App.P.

Case 2:08-cv-01469-PGR Document 25 Filed 10/06/10 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

1

 The controlling statute, 28 U.S.C. § 2107(c), provides:

The district court may, upon motion filed not later than 30 days after

the expiration of the time otherwise set for bringing appeal, extend

the time for appeal upon a showing of excusable neglect or good

cause. In addition, if the district court finds - 

(1) that a party entitled to notice of the entry of a judgment or

order did not receive such notice from the clerk or any party within 21

days of its entry, and

(2) that no party would be prejudiced,

the district court may, upon motion filed within 180 days after entry of

the judgment or order or within 14 days after receipt of such notice,

whichever is earlier, reopen the time for appeal for a period of 14

days from the date of entry or the order reopening the time for

appeal.

- 2 -

4(a)(1)(A), a notice of appeal in a civil case must be filed within 30 days after the

entry of the judgment being appealed. An appeal from the denial of a habeas

petition is considered a “civil” matter for purposes of these time limitations.

Malone v. Avenenti, 850 F.2d 569, 571 (9th Cir.1988). Since the 30-day appeal

deadline is mandatory and jurisdictional, the Court only has the authority to

extend it as provided in 28 U.S.C. § 2107(c) and Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(5) and/or (6),

Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 127 S.Ct. 2360 (2007), and the petitioner clearly

failed to seek an appeal extension within the limited time provided by federal law.1

To the extent that the petitioner seeks to have the Court create an equitable

exception to the appeal deadline, the Court has no authority to do so. Id. at 214,

127 S.Ct. at 2366.

Second, the petitioner is not entitled to a certificate of appealability

because (1) as to the habeas claims denied on their merits, the petitioner has not

made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, and (2) as to

the habeas claims found to be procedurally defaulted, the dismissal was justified

Case 2:08-cv-01469-PGR Document 25 Filed 10/06/10 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 -

by a plain procedural bar and jurists of reason would not find the procedural ruling

debatable.

Third, the petitioner is not entitled to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis

because the Court certifies pursuant to Fed.R.App.P. 24(a)(3)(A) that the appeal

is not taken in good faith inasmuch as it is time-barred. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that the petitioner’s motion for an extension of time to

appeal (Doc. 20) is denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petitioner’s motion for the issuance of

a certificate of appealability (Doc. 20) is denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petitioner’s motion to proceed on

appeal in forma pauperis (Docs. 20 and 22) is denied.

DATED this 5th day of October, 2010.

Case 2:08-cv-01469-PGR Document 25 Filed 10/06/10 Page 3 of 3