Hyatt v. Branker

Filing 42

ORDER granting 37 Motion for Certificate of Appealability. Signed by District Judge Lacy Thornburg on December 16, 2008. (nll)

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES F O R THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA A S H E V IL L E DIVISION C IV IL NO. 1:05CV55 T E R R Y ALVIN HYATT, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) Vs. ) ) G E R A L D BRANKER, Central Prison, ) R a le ig h , North Carolina, ) ) Respondent. ) ______________________________ )

MEMORANDUM A N D ORDER

T H IS MATTER is before the Court on Terry Alvin Hyatt's motion for a c e rtific a te of appealability pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) and Federal R u le of Appellate Procedure 22. Motion for Certificate of Apealability, file d November 26, 2008. Hyatt seeks to appeal the Court's denial of C la im s I, II, III, IV, V, VI, IX, XII, and XIII of his petition for writ of habeas c o rp u s filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. This Court may issue a certificate of appealability (hereinafter "COA") o n ly if Hyatt has made a "substantial showing of the denial of a c o n s titu tio n a l right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). As the United States S u p r e m e Court has stated, "`[w]here a district court has rejected the

2

c o n s titu tio n a l claims on the merits, the showing required to satisfy § 2 2 5 3 (c ) is straightforward: The petitioner must demonstrate that re a s o n a b le jurists would find the district court's assessment of the c o n s titu tio n a l claims debatable or wrong.'" Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 3 2 2 , 338 (2003) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)). However, when a district court denies a claim on procedural grounds, a COA should issue when the petitioner shows, at least, that ju ris ts of reason would find it debatable whether the petition s ta te s a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and th a t jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district c o u rt was correct in its procedural ruling. S la c k , 529 U.S. at 484. It is this Court's view that reasonable jurists would find the Court's a s s e s s m e n t of the constitutional issues raised in Claims I, II, III, IV, XII, and X III of Hyatt's habeas petition "debatable or wrong.'" See Miller-El, 537 U .S . at 338. Furthermore, it is this Court's view that jurists of reason would fin d it debatable whether Claims V, VI and IX state a valid constitutional c la im and could debate whether this Court was correct in denying those c la im s on procedural grounds. See Slack, 529 U.S. at 484. IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Hyatt's motion for a certificate o f appealability is hereby GRANTED.

3 Signed: December 16, 2008