Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02835/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02835-5/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

WILLIAM A. BLACK, No. 2:06-cv-02835-MCE-KJM P

Petitioner, 

vs. ORDER

MICHAEL KRAMER,

Respondent. 

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has timely filed a notice of appeal of this

court's March 4, 2008 dismissal 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).

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). 

When the district court denies a habeas petition on procedural grounds without reaching the

prisoner's underlying constitutional claim, a certificate of appealability should issue when the

prisoner shows that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid

claim of the denial of a constitutional right and that jurists of reason would find it debatable

Case 2:06-cv-02835-MCE -KJM Document 24 Filed 03/28/08 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

whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,

484-85 (2000). The certificate of appealability must “indicate which specific issue or issues

satisfy” the above requirements. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(3).

For the reasons set forth in the magistrate judge’s January 30, 2008 findings and

recommendations, and this court’s March 4, 2008 order, jurists of reason would not find it

debatable whether petitioner’s application was properly dismissed. Accordingly, a certificate of

appealability should not issue in this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 27, 2008

________________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-02835-MCE -KJM Document 24 Filed 03/28/08 Page 2 of 2