Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00329/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00329-5/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Arnold Schwarzenegger
Respondent
Roderick Washington
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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RODERICK WASHINGTON,

Petitioner,

v.

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, et al.,

Respondent.

 /

1:07-CV-00329 LJO DLB HC

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

[Doc. 19]

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

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

On October 30, 2007, the Court dismissed the instant petition, without prejudice, for

failure to exhaust the state judicial remedies, and judgment was entered this same date. (Court

Docs. 16, 17.) Petitioner filed a notice of appeal on November 5, 2007, along with a motion for

a certificate of appealability. (Court Docs. 18, 19.) 

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

underlying constitutional claims, the petitioner must show, in order to obtain a certificate of

appealability: (1) that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition stated a valid

claim of a denial of a constitutional right; and (2) that jurists of reason would find it debatable

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

484 (2000). While both showings must be made to obtain a certificate of appealability, “a court

may find that it can dispose of the application in a fair and prompt manner if it proceeds first to

Case 1:07-cv-00329-LJO -DLB Document 20 Filed 12/10/07 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

resolve the issue whose answer is more apparent from the record and arguments.” Slack, 529

U.S. at 485. 

The Court finds that Petitioner has failed to make an adequate showing. The Court does

not find that jurists of reason would not find it debatable whether the petition was properly

dismissed, without prejudice, for failure to exhaust the state judicial remedies. Petitioner has not

made the required substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Accordingly, the

Court hereby DENIES Petitioner's motion for certificate of appealability.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 7, 2007 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-00329-LJO -DLB Document 20 Filed 12/10/07 Page 2 of 2