Tyler v. Huber et al
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS ORDERED: Petitioner shall have until August 22, 2011, to file a motion for certificate of appealability and brief in support. In the event that petitioner fails to file a motion and brief, as set forth in this memorandum and order, the Court will deny the issuance of a certificate of appealability without further notice. The clerk of the court is directed to set a pro se case management in this case with the following text: August 22, 2011: check for filing of motion for certificate of appealability. Ordered by Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(TCL )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
HUBER and DOUGLAS COUNTY
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On July 18, 2011, the Court dismissed petitioner’s
habeas corpus claims and entered judgment against him (Filing
Nos. 8 and 9).
On July 21, 2011, petitioner filed a Notice of
Appeal (Filing No. 10).
However, before petitioner may appeal the dismissal of
his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, a “Certificate of
Appealability” must issue.
Pursuant to the Antiterrorism and
Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”), the right to
appeal such a dismissal is governed by 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c), which
(c)(1) Unless a circuit justice or
judge issues a certificate of
appealability, an appeal may not be
taken to the court of appeals from–
(A) the final order in a habeas
corpus proceeding in which the
detention complained of arises out
of process issued by a State court;
. . . .
A certificate of appealability
may issue under paragraph (1)
only if the applicant has made
a substantial showing of the
denial of a constitutional
The certificate of
appealability under paragraph
(1) shall indicate which
specific issue or issues
satisfy the showing required
A certificate of appealability may issue only if the
applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a
See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).
showing requires a demonstration “that reasonable jurists could
debate whether (or, for that matter, agree that) the petition
should have been resolved in a different manner or that the
issues presented were adequate to deserve encouragement to
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)
(internal quotation marks omitted), citing Barefoot v. Estelle,
463 U.S. 894 (1983) (defining pre-AEDPA standard for a
certificate of probable cause to appeal).
Petitioner has not filed a motion for a Certificate of
Appealability or a brief in support.
(See Docket Sheet.)
Similarly, Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22(b), as
amended by the AEDPA, indicates that in an action pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2254, a notice of appeal triggers the requirement that
the district judge who rendered the judgment either issue a
certificate of appealability or state the reasons why such a
certificate should not issue. See generally Tiedeman v. Benson,
122 F.3d 518, 521 (8th Cir. 1997).
this matter cannot proceed on appeal until the question of the
certificate of appealability is considered.
IT IS ORDERED:
Petitioner shall have until August 22, 2011, to
file a motion for certificate of appealability and brief in
In the event that petitioner fails to file a
motion and brief, as set forth in this memorandum and order, the
Court will deny the issuance of a certificate of appealability
without further notice.
The clerk of the court is directed to set a pro se
case management in this case with the following text: August 22,
2011: check for filing of motion for certificate of
DATED this 25th day of July, 2011.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Lyle E. Strom
LYLE E. STROM, Senior Judge
United States District Court
* This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or
Web sites. The U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska
does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third
parties or the services or products they provide on their Web
sites. Likewise, the Court has no agreements with any of these
third parties or their Web sites. The Court accepts no
responsibility for the availability or functionality of any
hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or
directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion
of the Court.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?