Opinion ID: 16333
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Standard for CPC Issuance

Text: 10 In an appeal from a request for habeas relief, we review a district court's findings of fact for clear error and issues of law de novo. Moody v. Johnson, 139 F.3d 477, 480 (5th Cir.1998). 11 Because Little's habeas request predates passage of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, the issuance of a CPC is a jurisdictional prerequisite to appellate review of his habeas petition. See Washington v. Johnson, 90 F.3d 945, 949 (5th Cir.1996); see also Fed. R.App. P. 22(b). To obtain a CPC, a petitioner must make a substantial showing of the denial of a federal right. Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893, 103 S.Ct. 3383, 3394, 77 L.Ed.2d 1090 (1983) (internal quotations and citations omitted). A petitioner can meet this burden by demonstrating that the issues [presented] are debatable among jurists of reason; that a court could resolve the issues in a different manner; or that the questions are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further. Id. at 893 n. 4, 103 S.Ct. at 3394-95 n. 4 (internal quotations, emphasis, and citations omitted). The nature of the penalty in a capital case is a proper consideration in determining whether to issue a [CPC], but the severity of the penalty does not in itself suffice to warrant the automatic issuing of a certificate. Id. at 893, 103 S.Ct. at 3394-95. With these standards in mind, the court will now address each of Little's contentions in turn. 12