United States District Court, S.D. California
December 9, 2005.
DeANGELO MATHEW COOPER, Petitioner,
RICHARD J. KIRKLAND, Warden, Respondent.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: IRMA GONZALEZ, District Judge
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DENYING PETITION FOR
WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS; DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY [DOC
DeAngelo Mathew Cooper, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has
filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his February 11, 1999 conviction and
subsequent sentence in San Diego County Superior Court Case No.
SCD139243. The case was referred to Magistrate Judge Nita L.
Stormes pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule
On October 4, 2005, Magistrate Judge Stormes issued a report
and recommendation recommending that the petition be denied on
the merits. Magistrate Judge Stormes ordered that any objections
be filed on or before October 31, 2005. No objections have been
The Court, having reviewed de novo Magistrate Judge Stormes'
report and recommendation, finds it to be well-reasoned. The
Court, therefore, adopts the report and recommendation in full.
The petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DENIED.
On September 26, 2005, prior to issuance of the report and
recommendation, Petitioner filed a request for a certificate of
appealability. A certificate of appealability is authorized "if
the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a
constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). When a
petitioner's claims have been denied on their merits, as here, a
petitioner can meet the threshold "substantial showing of the
denial of a constitutional right," by demonstrating that: (1) the
issues are debatable among jurists of reason; or (2) that a court
could resolve the issues in a different manner; or (3) that the
questions are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed
further. Lambright v. Stewart, 220 F.3d 1022, 1024-25 (9th Cir.
2000), citing Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (2000). Upon
review, the Court concludes that Petitioner has not made a
"substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right."
Petitioner's claims plainly lack merit. Therefore, his request
for a certificate of appealability [Doc. No. 16] is also DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.