Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-05319/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-05319-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:1651 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BOMANI JAHI BROADNAX,

Plaintiff,

v.

DAVID LIVINGSTON, Contra Costa

County Sheriff,

Defendant. /

No. C 13-05319 WHA

ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE

OF APPEALABILITY

This is a habeas case under 28 U.S.C. 2254 filed by a state prisoner represented by

counsel. The petition was denied on its merits in an order dated February 10, 2015. Judgment

was entered that day. Petitioner now moves for a certificate of appealability (“COA”).

A petitioner may not appeal a final order in a federal habeas corpus proceeding without

first obtaining a certificate of appealability (formerly known as a certificate of probable cause to

appeal). See 28 U.S.C. 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). A judge shall grant a certificate of

appealability “only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2). The certificate must indicate which issues satisfy

this standard. “Where a district court has rejected the constitutional claims on the merits, the

showing required to satisfy Section 2253(c) is straightforward: the petitioner must demonstrate

that reasonable jurists would find the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims

debatable or wrong.” Slack v. McDaniel, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 1604 (2000). For the reasons set out 

Case 3:13-cv-05319-WHA Document 13 Filed 02/20/15 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

in the ruling on the petition (Dkt. No. 9), jurists of reason would not find the result debatable or

wrong. The motion for a certificate of appealability (Dkt. No. 11) is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 19, 2015. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:13-cv-05319-WHA Document 13 Filed 02/20/15 Page 2 of 2