Woods v. Chappell et al

Filing 9

ORDER Denying Request for Certificate of Appealability. For the reasons stated in this Court's January 11, 2013 Order [ECF No. 4], the Court concludes that jurists of reason would not find it debatable whether this Court was correct in ruling th at Petitioner must first obtain permission from the Ninth Circuit to file a second or successive petition. Accordingly the Request for Certificate of Appealability is DENIED. Signed by Judge Anthony J. Battaglia on 2/21/13.(Order electronically transmitted to US Court of Appeals. All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service.)(skh)(jrd)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 EARNEST CASSELL WOODS, II, 12 12-3088 AJB (NLS) Petitioner, 13 14 Civil No. ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY v. KEVIN CHAPPELL, et al., Respondents. 15 16 On December 26, 2012, Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, submitted a Petition 17 for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (ECF No. 1.) The Court dismissed 18 the matter on January 11, 2013, on the grounds that it was second or successive and thus barred 19 by the “gatekeeper” provision of 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). (See Order dated Jan. 11, 2013, 20 ECF No. 4.) On February 14, 2013, Petitioner filed a Notice of Appeal, which has been 21 construed as a request for a certificate of appealability. 22 In order to appeal a final order in a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 case, a petitioner must obtain a 23 certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). A district 24 court should issue a certificate of appealability in a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 case when the appeal 25 presents a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). 26 If jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial 27 of a constitutional right, or that the court’s procedural ruling was correct, a certificate should 28 issue. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). I:\Chambers Battaglia\DJ CASES\2 Orders to be filed\COA.wpd, 22113 -1- 12cv3088 1 For the reasons stated in this Court’s January 11, 2013 Order [ECF No. 4], the Court 2 concludes that jurists of reason would not find it debatable whether this Court was correct in 3 ruling that Petitioner must first obtain permission from the Ninth Circuit to file a second or 4 successive petition. Accordingly the Request for Certificate of Appealability is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 6 7 DATED: February 21, 2013 8 Hon. Anthony J. Battaglia U.S. District Judge 9 10 Copies to: ALL PARTIES 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 I:\Chambers Battaglia\DJ CASES\2 Orders to be filed\COA.wpd, 22113 -2- 12cv3088

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?