Melendez v. Hedgepath
Filing
24
ORDER DENYING CEERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 3/24/2014. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/26/2014)
1
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
JULIO MELENDEZ, AA-7292,
Petitioner,
10
11
vs.
12
A. HEDGPETH, Warden,
13
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. C 12-0386 CRB (PR)
(9th Cir. No. 14-15453)
ORDER DENYING
CERTIFICATE OF
APPEALABILITY
14
15
On April 17, 2013, the court denied Julio Melendez’s petition for a writ of
16
habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on the merits, denied a certificate of
17
appealability (COA) as to any of the claims and entered judgment in favor of
18
respondent. Docket #12 & 13.
19
On June 19, 2013, Melendez filed a motion for relief from judgment on
20
the ground that the court denied his petition before he had an opportunity to
21
prepare and file a traverse. The court denied the motion without prejudice to
22
renewing if accompanied by a traverse. Docket #16.
23
On December 23, 2013, Melendez filed a second motion for relief from
24
judgment accompanied by a traverse. The court denied the motion because
25
“nothing in it, or in the attached traverse, compel a different conclusion than that
26
reached by the court in its April 17, 2013 order denying the petition for a writ of
27
habeas corpus and denying a certificate of appealability.” Docket #19 at 1.
28
Melendez appealed.
1
On March 13, 2014, the Ninth Circuit construed Melendez’s appeal as
2
arising from the denial of his motion for relief from judgment and remanded the
3
matter to this court for the limited purpose of granting or denying a COA on the
4
denial of Melendez’s motion for relief from judgment.
5
A COA is DENIED because Melendez has not made “a substantial
6
showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).
7
Melendez has not demonstrated that “jurists of reason would find it debatable
8
whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and
9
that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct
10
11
in its procedural ruling.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).
The clerk shall forward to the Ninth Circuit the case file with this order.
12
See United States v. Asrar, 116 F.3d 1268, 1270 (9th Cir. 1997).
13
SO ORDERED.
14
DATED: March 24, 2014
CHARLES R. BREYER
United States District Judge
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
G:\PRO-SE\CRB\HC.12\Melendez, J.12-0386.coa.wpd
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?