Hernandez v. Evans et al

Filing 22

ORDER by Judge Thelton E. Henderson denying 21 Motion for Certificate of Appealability. (tehlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/31/2009) (Additional attachment(s) added on 9/1/2009: # 1 Certificate of Service) (rbe, COURT STAFF).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RODRIGO VASQUEZ HERNANDEZ, Petitioner, v. ANTHONY HEDGPETH, Respondent.

NO. C08-2892 TEH ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12

The Court is in receipt of Petitioner Rodrigo Vasquez Hernandez's application for a

13 certificate of appealability.1 The application is DENIED because the Court finds that 14 Petitioner has failed to make a "substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right" on 15 any of his claims. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); see also Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483-84 16 (2000) (explaining that an applicant satisfies this standard where he or she shows that 17 reasonable jurists could find the issues debatable or that the issues are "adequate to deserve 18 encouragement to proceed further") (quoting Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893 n.4 19 (1983)). The Clerk shall forward the case file to the court of appeals with this order. United 20 States v. Asrar, 116 F.3d 1268, 1270 (9th Cir. 1997). 21 22 IT IS SO ORDERED. 23 24 Dated: 08/31/09 25 26
1 In his request, Petitioner again raises the specter of a violation of Brady v. Maryland, 27 373 U.S. 83 (1963), but no such claim was presented in his petition. If Petitioner wishes to file a second habeas petition raising this claim, he must first obtain authorization from the 28 United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3).

THELTON E. HENDERSON, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT