Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-01371/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-01371-3/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

 Pursuant to Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 275-76, 108 S. Ct. 2379, 2385 (1988), pro

1

se prisoner filing is dated from the date prisoner delivers it to prison authorities. See Fed. R.

App. P. 4(c)(1).

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KEVIN W. DUNIGAN,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-08-1371 LKK GGH P

vs.

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

SACRAMENTO COUNTY, et al.,

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for a writ of habeas

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On August 21, 2008, judgment was entered in this court

dismissing the petition. On September 4, 2008, petitioner filed a document which the court

construed as a motion pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. R. 60(b), which was denied by an order, filed on

December 24, 2008. By application of the mailbox rule, the motion is deemed to have been filed

on September 2, 2008. Thereafter, on January 28, 2009, petitioner filed a notice of appeal, which

1

by application of the mailbox rule, was evidently filed on January 20, 2009. Petitioner has timely

Case 2:08-cv-01371-LKK-GGH Document 26 Filed 03/16/09 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

filed an appeal of the judgment because his Rule 60(b) motion was filed within ten (10) days after

the judgment was entered, and petitioner filed his notice of appeal within thirty days of the

motion’s denial. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(A)(vi).

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 July 23, 2008 findings and

recommendations, petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional

right. Accordingly, a certificate of appealability should not issue in this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: March 13, 2009.

Case 2:08-cv-01371-LKK-GGH Document 26 Filed 03/16/09 Page 2 of 2