Walker v. Steele

Filing 24

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioners Motion for Leave to Appeal in Forma Pauperis 22 is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioners Application for Reconsideration for Certificates of Appealability 20 is DENIED. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 3/15/2016. (KMS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
DAROLD WALKER,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Petitioner,
v.
CINDY GRIFFITH,
Respondent.

No. 4:13-cv-182-JAR

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Petitioner Darold Walker’s Motion for Leave to
Appeal In Forma Pauperis (Doc. No. 22) and Application for Reconsideration for Certificates of
Appealability (Doc. No. 20) as to Grounds 3 and 4 of his habeas petition challenging alleged
errors by the post-conviction motion court.
On February 16, 2016, this Court entered an order denying Petitioner's petition for writ of
habeas corpus. (Doc. No. 18) That order further denied Petitioner a certificate of appealability. A
certificate of appealability will be issued “only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of
the denial of a constitutional right” and has “indicate[d] which specific issue or issues satisfy the
showing required.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), (3). Additionally, “the petitioner ‘must demonstrate
that the issues are debatable among jurists of reason; that a court could resolve the issues [in a
different manner]; or that the questions are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed
further.’ ” Randolf v. Kemna, 276 F.3d 401, 403 n. 1 (8th Cir. 2002) (internal citations omitted).
As the Court concluded in its February 16, 2016 order, Petitioner has not met this standard in
that claims of errors in a state post-conviction proceeding do not raise constitutional issues
cognizable in a federal habeas petition. Therefore, Petitioner’s application will be denied.

Petitioner has also sought leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. Upon review of
the record in this matter, this Court had previously found Petitioner financially unable to pay any
portion of the required filing fee in this Court (Doc. No. 3) and shall therefore grant his request
on appeal.
Accordingly, after careful review and consideration,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for Leave to Appeal in Forma
Pauperis [22] is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s Application for Reconsideration for
Certificates of Appealability [20] is DENIED.

Dated this 15th day of March, 2016.

JOHN A. ROSS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-