Badillo v. Grandlienard

Filing 21

ORDER denying Certificate of Appealability. Signed by Senior Judge David S. Doty on 9/25/2015. (DLO) cc: Plaintiff. Modified on 9/25/2015 (lmb).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Civil No. 14-4824(DSD/TNL)
Jovan Badillo,
Petitioner,
ORDER

v.
Warden Kent Grandlienard,
Respondent.

Jovan Badillo, #217620, MCF-Oak Park Heights, 5329 Osgood
Avenue North, Stillwater, MN 55082, pro se petitioner.
Matthew Frank and James B. Early, Minnesota Attorney General’s
Office, 455 Minnesota Street, Suite 1800, St. Paul, MN 55101;
Jean E. Burdorf, Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, 300 South
Sixth Street, Suite 2000, Minneapolis, MN 55487, counsel for
respondent.
This matter is before the court pursuant to a remand by the
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit for a
determination as to whether a certificate of appealability should
be issued.
To warrant a certificate of appealability, a petitioner must
make a “substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional
right” as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).
showing”

requires

a

petitioner

to

A “substantial

establish

that

“reasonable

jurists” would find the court’s assessment of the constitutional
claims “debatable or wrong.”
483–84

(2000).

As

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,

discussed

in

detail

in

the

report

and

recommendation adopted in full by the court [ECF Nos. 16, 17], the

court is firmly convinced that Badillo’s claims are baseless, and
that reasonable jurists could not differ on the results given the
nature of his arguments.

Accordingly, based on the above, IT IS

HEREBY ORDERED that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, the court denies
a certificate of appealability.

Dated:

September 25, 2015

s/David S. Doty
David S. Doty, Judge
United States District Court

2