Robinson v. MacEachern

Filing 30

Judge F. Dennis Saylor, IV: ORDER ON CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY entered. Certificate of appealability is DENIED as to all of petitioners claims.(Cicolini, Pietro)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
__________________________________________
)
FRANK ROBINSON,
)
)
Petitioner,
)
)
Civil Action No.
v.
)
11-10541-FDS
)
DUANE MACEACHERN,
)
)
Respondent.
)
__________________________________________)

ORDER ON CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY
SAYLOR, J.
On January 29, 2013, this Court issued an order dismissing the petition for a writ of
habeas corpus. The basis for the Court’s ruling is provided in its Memorandum and Order
dismissing the petition.
To appeal the final order in a proceeding instituted under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, the petitioner
must first obtain a Certificate of Appealability (“COA”) from a circuit justice or a district court.
See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c). A COA will issue only if the petitioner “has made a substantial
showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” § 2253(c)(2). That standard is satisfied by
“demonstrating that jurists of reason could disagree with the district court’s resolution of
[petitioner’s] constitutional claims or that jurists could conclude the issues presented are
adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.” Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322,
327 (2003) (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)).
Petitioner claimed violations of his constitutional rights to a fair trial, due process, equal
protection, and effective assistance of counsel. As specific grounds for habeas relief, he

contended that (1) the Commonwealth used its peremptory challenges in a racially
discriminatory manner; (2) his trial counsel’s failures to object to the Commonwealth’s use of
peremptory challenges and to join his co-defendant’s counsel’s untimely objection constituted
ineffective assistance of counsel; and (3) his appellate counsel’s failure to challenge the judge’s
ruling on the objection and failure to raise the peremptory-challenge argument on appeal also
constituted ineffective assistance of counsel. The Court found his claims all to be procedurally
defaulted.
The Court now finds that petitioner has not presented any colorable claim as to which a
reasonable jurist could disagree with the Court’s conclusion. Accordingly, the Court finds that
the issuance of a COA is not warranted.
For the foregoing reasons, a certificate of appealability is DENIED as to all of
petitioner’s claims.
So Ordered.

/s/ F. Dennis Saylor
F. Dennis Saylor IV
United States District Judge
Dated: January 29, 2013

2