Williams v. Mayberg et al

Filing 62

ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on October 21, 2010. (mmcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/21/2010)

Williams v. Mayberg et al

Doc. 62

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MICHAEL B. WILLIAMS, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) ) STEPHEN MAYBERG, Warden, ) ) Respondent. ) ______________________________ ) No. C 03-5147 MMC (PR) ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY (Docket No. 56)

On November 21, 2003, petitioner, a civil detainee then confined at Atascadero State Hospital pursuant to California Welfare and Institutions Code § 6602, filed the above-titled petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging a 1991 state court conviction. On November 8, 2004, respondent's motion to dismiss the petition as untimely was granted, judgment was entered in respondent's favor, and the case was closed. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals thereafter denied petitioner's request for a certificate of appealability. Subsequently, petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration in this court, which motion was denied on April 27, 2007. Thereafter, the Court denied petitioner's request for a certificate of appealability with respect to the denial of the motion for reconsideration. The Court of Appeals likewise denied petitioner's request for a certificate of appealability with respect thereto. On October 15, 2009, petitioner filed a second motion for reconsideration. The Court denied that motion on August 3, 2010. Petitioner has now filed a notice of appeal and request for a certificate of appealability with respect to the denial of his second motion for

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

reconsideration. Petitioner has not shown, however, "that jurists of reason would find it debatable" whether the Court was correct in its ruling. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Accordingly, the request for a certificate of appealability is hereby DENIE The Clerk shall forward this order, along with the case file, to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, from which petitioner may also seek a certificate of appealability. See United States v. Asrar, 116 F.3d 1268, 1270 (9th Cir. 1997). This order terminates Docket No. 56. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: October 21, 2010 _________________________ MAXINE M. CHESNEY United States District Judge

2