Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-01637/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-01637-15/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

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RONALD EDWARD SMITH,

Petitioner,

 v.

CHARLES PLUMMER,

Respondent. /

No. C-06-1637 MMC

ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF

APPEALABILITY; GRANTING REQUEST

TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS;

DIRECTIONS TO CLERK 

Before the Court is petitioner’s Notice of Appeal and Request to Proceed In Forma

Pauperis, filed May 26, 2010.

The Court construes the Notice of Appeal as including a request for a certificate of

appealability pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) and Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure

22(b). See United States v. Asrar, 116 F.3d 1268, 1270 (9th Cir. 1997) (“If no express

request is made for a certificate of appealability, the notice of appeal shall be deemed to

constitute a request for a certificate.”). Petitioner has not shown, however, “that jurists of

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

constitutional right.” See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Accordingly, the

request for a certificate of appealability is hereby DENIED.

The Clerk shall forward this order, along with the case file, to the United States Court

of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, from which petitioner may also seek a certificate of

Case 3:06-cv-01637-MMC Document 43 Filed 06/01/10 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

appealability. See Fed. R. App. P. 22(b)(1).

To the extent petitioner seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal,

petitioner’s request is hereby GRANTED, petitioner previously having been afforded leave

to proceed in forma pauperis and there being no showing that petitioner is now proceeding

in bad faith or is no longer entitled to proceed in forma pauperis. See Fed. R. App. P.

24(a)(3).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 1, 2010 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-01637-MMC Document 43 Filed 06/01/10 Page 2 of 2