Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00234/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00234-0/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

 On March 23, 2005, the Magistrate Judge granted petitioner’s request for an extension

of time in which to file his notice of appeal. 

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RUBEN ANTONIO BANUELOS,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-0234 WBS KJM P

vs.

M. YARBOROUGH, Warden, 

Respondent. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has timely 1filed a notice of appeal

of this court's March 1, 2005 dismissal of his application for a writ of habeas corpus for failure to

exhaust state remedies. 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). 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 2:04-cv-00234-WBS -KJM Document 23 Filed 04/21/05 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

Where, as here, the petition was dismissed on procedural grounds, a certificate of

appealability “should issue if the prisoner can show: (1) ‘that jurists of reason would find it

debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling’; and (2) ‘that jurists of

reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a

constitutional right.’” Morris v. Woodford, 229 F.3d 775, 780 (9th Cir. 2000) (quoting Slack v.

McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 1604 (2000)).

After a review of the record in this case IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a

certificate of appealability issue on the question of whether petitioner is entitled to equitable

tolling.

DATED: April 20, 2005

/ban0234.coa.pro

Case 2:04-cv-00234-WBS -KJM Document 23 Filed 04/21/05 Page 2 of 2