Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00728/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00728-5/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Tom L. Carey
Respondent
James E. Street
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES E. STREET )

)

Petitioner, )

)

 v. )

)

TOM L. CAREY, Warden, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:05-cv-0728-AWI-SMS-HC

ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF

APPEALABILITY

Petitioner is a state prisoner who had filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On February 15, 2006, the court adopted the Magistrate Judge's

Findings and Recommendations and dismissed the petition. Petitioner filed a notice of appeal.

 A state prisoner seeking a writ of habeas corpus has no absolute entitlement to

appeal a district court’s denial of his petition, and an appeal is only allowed in certain

circumstances. Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 335-36 (2003). The controlling statute is 28

U.S.C. § 2253, which provides as follows:

 (a) In a habeas corpus proceeding or a proceeding under section 2255 before a

district judge, the final order shall be subject to review, on appeal, by the court of

appeals for the circuit in which the proceeding is held.

 (b) There shall be no right of appeal from a final order in a proceeding to test the

validity of a warrant to remove to another district or place for commitment or trial

a person charged with a criminal offense against the United States, or to test the

validity of such person's detention pending removal proceedings.

 (c)(1) Unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability, an

appeal may not be taken to the court of appeals from–

 (A) the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding in which the detention

complained of arises out of process issued by a State court; or

 (B) the final order in a proceeding under section 2255.

 (2) A certificate of appealability may issue under paragraph (1) only if the

Case 1:05-cv-00728-AWI -SMS Document 21 Filed 06/21/06 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

27

28 2

applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.

 (3) The certificate of appealability under paragraph (1) shall indicate which

specific issue or issues satisfy the showing required by paragraph (2).

If the court denies a Petitioner’s petition, the court may only issue a certificate of appealability “if

jurists of reason could disagree with the district court's resolution of his constitutional claims or

that jurists could conclude the issues presented are adequate to deserve encouragement to

proceed further.” Miller-El, 537 U.S. at 327; Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). 

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

prisoner's underlying constitutional claim, a certificate of appealability should issue, and an

appeal of the district court's order may be taken, if the petitioner shows, at least, 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 whether the district court

was correct in its procedural ruling. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85 (2000). 

In the present case, the court finds that reasonable jurists would not disagree with

the court’s determination that this action is barred by the 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)’s one year statute

of limitations. Jurists of reason would not find it debatable whether Plaintiff is entitled to

equitable tolling. The record simply does not establish that Petitioner diligently sought his trial

transcripts or that the transcripts were necessary for Petitioner to file state habeas corpus

petitions. During the time Petitioner alleges he did not have his transcripts and Petitioner states

he was taking psychotropic drugs, Petitioner filed fully briefed state habeas corpus petitions

containing claims similar to those in this action. Accordingly, the court hereby ORDERS that

no certificate of appealability be issued.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 21, 2006 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00728-AWI -SMS Document 21 Filed 06/21/06 Page 2 of 2