Shorty v. Sisto et al
Filing
24
ORDER signed by Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr on 6/30/11 ORDERING that Petitioner's request for a certificate of appealability is DENIED. (Becknal, R)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
MACK NELSON SHORTY,
Petitioner,
13
14
15
16
No. CIV S-08-CV-1418 FCD CHS P
Respondent.
12
ORDER
vs.
D.K. SISTO,
/
17
Petitioner, Mack Nelson Shorty, is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition
18
for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner is currently serving an
19
indeterminate sentence of twenty years to life following his 1985 jury conviction for attempted
20
murder causing great bodily injury and a penalty enhancement for being a habitual offender. With
21
his petition, Petitioner does not challenge the constitutionality of that conviction, but rather, the
22
execution of his sentence and, specifically, the December 19, 2006 decision by the Board of Parole
23
Hearings finding him unsuitable for parole.
24
On April 19, 2011, judgment in this case became final after the United States District
25
Court Judge adopted in full the findings and recommendations filed by the United States Magistrate
26
Judge. Petitioner now wishes to appeal the judgment of the court, and requests a certificate of
1
1
appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). A certificate of appealability may
2
issue under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 “if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a
3
constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). The certificate of appealability must “indicate which
4
specific issue or issues satisfy” the requirement. 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(3). A certificate of appealability
5
should be granted for any issue that Petitioner can demonstrate is “‘debatable among jurists of
6
reason,’” could be resolved differently by a different court, or is “‘adequate to deserve
7
encouragement to proceed further.’” Jennings v. Woodford, 2990 F.3d 1006, 1010 (9th Cir. 2002)
8
(quoting Barefood v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893 (1983)).1 In this case, Petitioner has failed to make
9
a substantial showing with respect to any of the claims presented.
10
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
11
1.
Petitioner’s request for a certificate of appealability is DENIED.
12
13
DATED: June 30, 2011.
14
_______________________________________
FRANK C. DAMRELL, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
1
Except for the requirement that appealable issues be specifically identified, the standard
for a certificate of appealability is the same as the standard applied to issuance of a certificate of
probable cause. Jennings, 290 F.3d at 1010.
2
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?