Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-06107/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-06107-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Delmar Falls
Petitioner
Gail Lewis
Respondent

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

DELMAR FALLS, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

)

GAIL LEWIS, )

 )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:02-cv-06107-OWW-TAG-HC

ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF

APPEALABILITY

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in an application for a writ of habeas

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate

Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72-302. 

On February 12, 2007, the Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation that was

served on all parties and which contained notice that any objections to the Report and

Recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. (Doc. 20). On February 27, 2007,

Petitioner filed his objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 21). 

Case 1:02-cv-06107-OWW -TAG Document 25 Filed 06/06/07 Page 1 of 3
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

On March 13, 2007, the Court entered an order adopting the Magistrate Judge's Report and

Recommendations and denying Petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus. (Doc. 22). 

Judgment was entered on March 13, 2007. (Doc. 23). 

On April 20, 2007, Petitioner filed a notice of appeal of the district court's judgment. 

(Doc. 24). The notice of appeal contained a more for issuance of a certificate of appealability. 

(Doc. 24, p. 2). The requirement that a petitioner seek a certificate of appealability is a gatekeeping mechanism that protects the Court of Appeals from having to devote resources to

frivolous issues, while at the same time affording petitioners an opportunity to persuade the

Court that, through full briefing and argument, the potential merit of claims may appear. 

Lambright v. Stewart, 220 F.3d 1022, 1025 (9th Cir. 2000). However, 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, 335-336 (2003). The controlling statute, 28 U.S.C. § 2253, 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 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).

Accordingly, final orders issued by a federal district court in habeas corpus proceedings

are reviewable by the circuit court of appeals, and, in order to have final orders reviewed, a

petitioner must obtain a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253. This Court will issue a

certificate of appealability when a petitioner makes a substantial showing of the denial of a

constitutional right. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). To make a substantial showing, the petitioner must

establish that “reasonable jurists could debate whether (or, for that matter, agree that) the petition

Case 1:02-cv-06107-OWW -TAG Document 25 Filed 06/06/07 Page 2 of 3
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

3

should have been resolved in a different manner or that the issues presented were ‘adequate to

deserve encouragement to proceed further’.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)

(quoting Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893 (1983)).

In the present case, the Court finds that Petitioner has not made the required substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right to justify the issuance of a certificate of

appealability. Reasonable jurists would not find it debatable that Petitioner has not shown an

entitlement to federal habeas corpus relief. Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS that

Petitioner’s request for a certificate of appealability is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 5, 2007 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:02-cv-06107-OWW -TAG Document 25 Filed 06/06/07 Page 3 of 3