Ramirez-Lucio v. United States of America

Filing 22

ORDER re 21 Notice of Appeal filed by Jesus Ramirez-Lucio denying Certificate of Appealability, signed by Judge Ronald B. Leighton. (DN) Modified on 6/10/2014 (DN). (cc to pltf)

1

HONORABLE RONALD B. LEIGHTON

2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

7
8

JESUS RAMIREZ-LUCIO,

CASE NO. C13-5118 RBL

9
Petitioner,
10

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
CERTIFICATE OF APPEAL

v.
11
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
12
Respondent.
13
14

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Petitioner Ramirez-Lucio’s Motion for a

15 Certificate of Appealability [Dkt. #21] regarding this Court’s denial of his §2255 petition [Dkt.
16 #19].
17

The district court should grant an application for a Certificate of Appealability only if the

18 petitioner makes a “substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. §
19 2253(c)(3). To obtain a Certificate of Appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c), a habeas
20 petitioner must make a showing that reasonable jurists could debate whether, or agree that, the
21 petition should have been resolved in a different manner or that the issues presented were
22 adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further. Slack v. McDaniel, 120 S.Ct. 1595,
23 1603-04 (2000) (quoting Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893 n.4 (1983)).
24
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR CERTIFICATE
OF APPEAL - 1

1

Petitioner’s primary claim is that his counsel was ineffective. For the reasons articulated

2 in this Court’s prior Order, those claims are not viable. Petitioner has not made a “substantial
3 showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” His Motion for a Certificate of Appealability is
4 therefore DENIED.
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.

6

Dated this 10th day of June, 2014.

8

A

9

RONALD B. LEIGHTON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

7

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR CERTIFICATE
OF APPEAL - 2