Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00824/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00824-18/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

Larry Scribner is the Warden of Calipatria State Prison, where the prisoner was 1

incarcerated at the time of the filing of his original federal petition for a writ of habeas corpus. 

Mr. Scribner was also named as Respondent in Petitioner’s first amended petition. (Doc. No.

22). Prior orders of this Court have erroneously named Placer County Superior Court as the

Respondent in this matter. Placer County Superior Court has never been a party in this matter. 

The record is hereby corrected. 

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JUAN CARLOS AYALA-SANCHEZ,

Petitioner, Case No. 2:06-cv-00824-ALA-GGH (HC) 

vs.

LARRY SCRIBNER, Warden,

Respondent. ORDER 1

 /

This Court dismissed Petitioner Juan Carlos Ayala-Sanchez’s (“Ayala-Sanchez”)

application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a) because he failed to

exhaust his state remedies before filing his federal petition. (Doc. 46). Pending before this Court

is Ayala-Sanchez’s Notice of Appeal. (Doc. 48). Before Petitioner can appeal this decision, a

certificate of appealability must issue. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b)(1).

“A certificate of appealability may issue . . . only if the applicant has made a substantial

Case 2:06-cv-00824-ALA -GGH Document 49 Filed 09/15/08 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

2

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S. C. § 2253(c)(2). Because this Court

dismissed Ayala-Sanchez’s application on procedural grounds, the constitutional merits were not

reached. This Court cannot issue a certificate of appealability “[w]here a plain procedural bar is

present and the district court is correct to invoke it to dispose of the case, [and] a reasonable

jurist could not conclude either the district court erred in dismissing the petition or that the

petitioner should be allowed to proceed further.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). 

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a certificate of appealability shall not issue.

/////

DATED: September 15, 2008

/s/ Arthur L. Alarcón 

UNITED STATES CIRCUIT JUDGE

Sitting by Designation 

Case 2:06-cv-00824-ALA -GGH Document 49 Filed 09/15/08 Page 2 of 2