Ross v. Oklahoma Department of Corrections et al

Filing 90

Certificate of Appealability Denied re 86 MOTION for Certificate of Appealability. Signed by Honorable David L. Russell on 8/25/15. (jw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
ARMOND DAVIS ROSS,
Petitioner,
v.
WARDEN ADDISON,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. CIV-13-323-R

ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Petitioner’s Application for Certificate of
Appealability [Doc. No. 86].
Petitioner is entitled to a certificate of appealability (COA), only upon making a
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).
Where a habeas petition is denied on procedural grounds, Petitioner is entitled to a COA only
if he demonstrates that “jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition states
a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and that jurists of reason would find it
debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling.” Slack v. McDaniel,
529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S. Ct. 1595, 146 L. Ed. 2d 542 (2000). Where a habeas petition is
denied on the merits, Petitioner is entitled to a COA only if he demonstrates “that jurists of
reason could disagree with the district court’s resolution of his constitutional claims or that
jurists could conclude the issues presented are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed
further.” Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 327, 123 S. Ct. 1029, 154 L. Ed. 2d 931, 944

(2003)(citing Slack v. McDaniel, supra). Petitioner has not made either showing and is
therefore not entitled to a COA. Petitioner’s application therefor is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 25th day of August, 2015.

2