Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00041/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00041-11/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Attorney General of California
Respondent
Victor Maciel Garcia
Petitioner

Document Text:

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 This disposition is not designated for publication in the official reports. 1

Case No. C 06-41 JF

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

(JFLC2)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VICTOR MACIEL GARCIA,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CALIFORNIA

 Respondent.

Case Number C 06-41 JF

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR 1

CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

On September 29, 2009, the Court denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus sought by

Petitioner Victor Maciel Garcia (“Petitioner”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, and entered

judgment for Respondent. On October 26, 2009, Petitioner filed a motion for a certificate of

appealability. 

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

first obtaining a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A). A court may issue a

Case 1:06-cv-00041-JF Document 58 Filed 02/22/10 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

Case No. C 06-41 JF

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

(JFLC2)

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). A certificate of appealability must indicate which

specific issues satisfy this requirement. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(3).

 “Where a district court has rejected the constitutional claims on the merits, the showing

required to satisfy § 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, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). 

This Court carefully considered all of the grounds for relief raised in the petition, and

concluded that Petitioner had failed to demonstrate a denial of a constitutional right. The Court

is not persuaded that reasonable jurists would find this conclusion debatable or wrong.

Accordingly, Petitioner’s motion for a certificate of appealability is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

The clerk shall forward to the court of appeals the case file with this order. See Fed. R.

App. P. 22(b). 

Dated: 2/22/2010

__________________________________

JEREMY FOGEL

United States District Judge

Case 1:06-cv-00041-JF Document 58 Filed 02/22/10 Page 2 of 2