Haden v. Martel et al

Filing 8

ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen Denying 6 Certificate of Appealability. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service). (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/3/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 STEVEN HADEN, 9 Petitioner, 10 v. 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court No. C-11-4799 EMC (pr) MICHAEL MARTEL, Warden, et al., 12 ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY Respondents. ___________________________________/ 13 14 15 Petitioner filed this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 to challenge the sentence imposed 16 for his 1998 spousal abuse conviction from the San Mateo County Superior Court. His earlier 17 habeas petition challenging that conviction, Haden v. Hubbard, No. C 01-20404 JF, was denied in 18 2004. The Court dismissed the present action without prejudice to Petitioner filing a new action 19 after he obtains permission from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to file a second or 20 successive petition. 21 Petitioner has filed a notice of appeal and application for a certificate of appealability. 22 See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c). The application for a certificate of appealability is DENIED. (Docket # 23 6.) This is not a case in which "jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a 24 valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and that jurists of reason would find it debatable 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// 1 whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling." Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 2 484 (2000). The Clerk shall forward to the Court of Appeals the case file with this Order. See 3 United States v. Asrar, 116 F.3d 1268, 1270 (9th Cir. 1997). 4 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 7 Dated: April 3, 2012 8 _________________________ EDWARD M. CHEN United States District Judge 9 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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?