(HC) Martin v. Pogue

Filing 9

ORDER ADOPTING 6 Findings and Recommendations; ORDER DISMISSING Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, DIRECTING Clerk of Court to Enter Judgment and CLOSE Case; ORDER DECLINING to Issue Certificate of Appealability, signed by District Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 9/14/2022. CASE CLOSED. (Rivera, O)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JARED ANDREW MARTIN, 12 Petitioner, 13 14 v. 17 ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 6) ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO ENTER JUDGMENT AND CLOSE CASE 15 16 No. 1:22-cv-01113-JLT-SKO (HC) TYSON J. POGUE, Respondent. ORDER DECLINING TO ISSUE CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY 18 19 The assigned magistrate judge issued Findings and Recommendations to dismiss the 20 petition as premature. (Doc. 6.) Those Findings and Recommendations were served upon all 21 parties and contained notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within 21 days after 22 service. On September 12, 2022, Petitioner filed objections to the Findings and 23 Recommendations. (Doc. 8.) 24 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de novo review of the 25 case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including Petitioner’s objections, the Court 26 concludes that the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations are supported by the 27 record and proper analysis. Petitioner’s objections present no grounds for questioning the 28 Magistrate Judge’s analysis. 1 1 In addition, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. A state prisoner 2 seeking a writ of habeas corpus has no absolute entitlement to appeal a district court’s denial of 3 his petition, and an appeal is only allowed in certain circumstances. Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 4 U.S. 322, 335-336 (2003). The controlling statute in determining whether to issue a certificate of 5 appealability is 28 U.S.C. § 2253, which provides as follows: 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 (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— 13 (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 14 (B) the final order in a proceeding under section 2255. 15 16 17 18 19 (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). If a court denies a petitioner’s petition, the court may only issue a certificate of 20 appealability when a petitioner makes a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. 21 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). To make a substantial showing, the petitioner must establish that 22 “reasonable jurists could debate whether (or, for that matter, agree that) the petition should have 23 been resolved in a different manner or that the issues presented were ‘adequate to deserve 24 encouragement to proceed further.’” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000) (quoting 25 Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893 (1983)). 26 The Court finds that Petitioner has not made the required substantial showing of the denial 27 of a constitutional right to justify the issuance of a certificate of appealability. Reasonable jurists 28 would not find the Court’s determination that Petitioner is not entitled to federal habeas corpus 2 1 relief debatable, wrong, or deserving of encouragement to proceed further. Thus, the Court 2 declines to issue a certificate of appealability. Accordingly, 3 1. 4 The Findings and Recommendations issued on September 16, 2022, (Doc. 6), are adopted in full. 5 2. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed. 6 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment and close the case. 7 4. The Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. 8 This order terminates the action in its entirety. 9 10 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September 14, 2022 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?