Brown v. Jackson

Filing 64

ORDER DENYING Certificate of Appealability Signed by District Judge Victoria A. Roberts. (CPin)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

STEVEN BROWN,
Petitioner,
v.

CASE NO. 06-cv-11868
HONORABLE VICTORIA A. ROBERTS

ANDREW JACKSON
Respondent.
__________________________________/
ORDER DENYING A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY
This matter is before the Court because Petitioner filed a notice of appeal of this
Court’s denial of his motion for relief from judgment filed pursuant to Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 60(b)(6). This arises from the Court’s denial of Petitioner's habeas
petition in 2009. A certificate of appealability is necessary for a habeas petitioner to
appeal the denial of a Rule 60(b) motion. Johnson v. Bell, 605 F.3d 333, 336 (6th Cir.
2010).
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). When
a court denies relief on the merits, the substantial showing threshold is met if the
petitioner demonstrates that reasonable jurists would find the court’s assessment of the
claim debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85 (2000). When a
court denies relief on procedural grounds without addressing the merits, a certificate of
appealability should issue if it is shown that jurists of reason would find it debatable
whether the petitioner states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right, and that
jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the court was correct in its procedural

ruling. Id. Both showings are required to be made before a certificate of appealability
may be issued. Id.
Having reviewed the matter, the Court concludes that Petitioner is not entitled to
a certificate of appealability from the denial of his motion for relief from judgment
because he has failed to demonstrate that jurists of reason would find it debatable that
the Court abused its discretion in denying his motion for relief from judgment or that
jurists of reason would find it debatable that the underlying petition states a valid claim
of the denial of a constitutional right. The Court properly determined that Petitioner’s
motion was untimely, that Petitioner failed to raise challenges on direct appeal, and that
he failed to present exceptional or extraordinary circumstances to set aside this Court’s
judgment.
Accordingly, the Court DENIES a certificate of appealability.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

S/Victoria A. Roberts
Victoria A. Roberts
United States District Judge
Dated: May 7, 2013
The undersigned certifies that a copy of this
document was served on the attorneys of
record and Steven Brown by electronic
means or U.S. Mail on May 7, 2013.
S/Carol A. Pinegar
Deputy Clerk

2