UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
November 18, 2009
MICHAEL CHAKIRIS, PETITIONER,
JAMES HARTLEY, RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Dana M. Sabraw United States District Judge
ORDER (1) DENYING REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY AND (2) DENYING MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON APPEAL [Docket No. 44]
On October 27, 2009, this Court entered judgment dismissing the petition for a writ of habeas corpus brought by Petitioner pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On November 16, 2009, Petitioner filed a Notice of Appeal, which this Court construes as an Application for Certificate of Appealability, along with a motion to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") on appeal.
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). "A petitioner satisfies this standard by demonstrating 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 (2003). See also Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Having reviewed the Petition, the R&R and the October 27, 2009 Order dismissing the Petition, the Court finds Petitioner has failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find this Court's dismissal of his petition debatable. Therefore, the Court denies Petitioner's request for a certificate of appealability.
The Court also denies Petitioner's motion to proceed IFP on appeal for failure to satisfy the requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(1)(A).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.