UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
April 13, 2009
PATRICK J. BOOTH, PETITIONER,
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ET.AL., RESPONDENTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sandra M. Snyder United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER DISREGARDING PETITIONER'S MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND MOTION FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY [Docs. 31, 32]
On March 23, 2009, the instant petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 was denied and judgment was entered in favor of Respondent. (Court Docs. 28, 29.) The Court also declined to issue a certificate of appealability. (Court Doc. 28.)
On April 2, 2009, Petitioner filed a notice of appeal, motion to proceed in forma pauperis, and motion for certificate of appealability. (Court Docs. 30, 31, 32.) I. Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis
A party who was permitted to proceed in forma pauperis in the district court may proceed in forma pauperis on appeal without further authorization unless the district court certifies that the appeal is not taken in good faith. See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3). Here, because Petitioner was granted in forma pauperis status on August 14, 2008 (court doc. 4), he is automatically entitled to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal, and his motion shall be DISREGARDED.
II. Motion for Certificate of Appealability
Petitioner requests an extension of time to file an application for a certificate of appealability. (Court Doc. 32.) However, Petitioner is advised that this Court has previously determined that a certificate of appealability shall not be issued, finding that "reasonable jurists would not find it debatable that the state courts' decision denying Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus were not 'objectively unreasonable.'" (Id. at p.20.)
Accordingly, Petitioner's request for an extension of time to file an application for a certificate of appealability is denied as MOOT.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.