Cruz v. Secretary, Department of Corrections et al

Filing 7

ORDER denying 6 Motion for Certificate of Appealability. Because Petitioner is not entitled to a certificate of appealability, he is not entitled to appeal in forma pauperis. Signed by Judge James S. Moody, Jr on 4/11/2013. (LN)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION

JIMMY L. CRUZ,
Petitioner,
-vs-

Case No. 8:13-cv-763-T-30TBM

DAVID GEE, SHERIFF,
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA,
Respondent.
__________________________________/
ORDER
Before the Court is Petitioner’s application for a certificate of appealability (Dkt. 6).
“A certificate of appealability may issue. . .only if the applicant has made a substantial
showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). To make such a
showing, Petitioner “must demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court’s
assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong,” Tennard v. Dretke, 542 U.S.
274, 282 (2004) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)), or that “the issues
presented were ‘adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.’” Miller-El v.
Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 335-36 (2003) (quoting Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893 n. 4
(1983)).
Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.

Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that Petitioner’s application for a certificate of
appealability (Dkt. 6) is DENIED. Because Petitioner is not entitled to a certificate of
appealability, he is not entitled to appeal in forma pauperis.
DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida on April 11, 2013.

SA:sfc
Copy to: Petitioner pro se

2