Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-01087/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-01087-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

---

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 

27 

28 

1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

BRANT EUGENE BAILEY, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

WARDEN, FCI HERLONG, 

Respondent. 

No. 2:23-cv-01087-KJM-EFB (HC) 

ORDER 

 Petitioner, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a notice of appeal of this court's 

August 26, 2024 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). 

 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). 

 For the reasons set forth in the magistrate judge’s April 24, 2024 order and June 17, 2024 

findings and recommendations and the court’s August 26, 2024 order, petitioner has not made a 

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. 

//// 

Case 2:23-cv-01087-KJM-EFB Document 20 Filed 12/20/24 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 

27 

28 

2 

Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that that the court decline to grant a 

certificate of appealability in this action. 

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the 

objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The 

parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to 

appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez 

v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 

Dated: December 20, 2024 

Case 2:23-cv-01087-KJM-EFB Document 20 Filed 12/20/24 Page 2 of 2