Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00929/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-00929-4/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JERRY RAY CAVINS, No. 2:03-cv-0929-MCE-KJM-P

Petitioner, 

v. ORDER

MELVIN HUNTER, et al.,

Respondents. 

 /

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

court's July 11, 2006 dismissal 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). 

When, as here, the district court denies a habeas petition on procedural grounds without reaching

the prisoner's underlying constitutional claims, a certificate of appealability should issue when

the prisoner shows that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a

valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and that jurists of reason would find it debatable

Case 2:03-cv-00929-MCE -KJM Document 53 Filed 08/09/06 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

whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,

484-85 (2000). The certificate of appealability must “indicate which specific issue or issues

satisfy” the above requirements. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(3).

 The court finds that jurists of reason would find it at least debatable whether the claims

asserted in petitioner’s second amended petition for writ of habeas corpus state valid claims of

the denial of constitutional rights. Also, jurists of reason would find it at least debatable whether

it was correct to dismiss this action as moot. Therefore, the court will grant petitioner’s request

for a certificate of appealability.

Petitioner also asks that the court appoint counsel on appeal. Good cause appearing,

petitioner’s request will be granted. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

1. Petitioner’s July 19, 2006 request for a certificate appealability is granted; and

2. Petitioner’s July 19, 2006 request for appointment of counsel on appeal is granted.

DATED: August 8, 2006

___________________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

Case 2:03-cv-00929-MCE -KJM Document 53 Filed 08/09/06 Page 2 of 2