IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
December 30, 2009
CURTIS JAMELL MEEKS, PETITIONER,
M. MCDONALD, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Richard C. Tallman United States Circuit Judge Sitting by designation
Petitioner Meeks, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has timely filed a notice of appeal of this court's October 22, 2009, decision denying his application for a writ of habeas corpus. In order to proceed with the appeal, Petitioner now seeks a certificate of appealability.
Before Petitioner can appeal the dismissal of his habeas corpus petition, a certificate of appealability must issue. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). Such a certificate may issue "only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). To meet this standard, Petitioner must raise an issue that is "debatable among jurists of reason," capable of being resolved differently, or "adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further." Jennings v. Woodford, 290 F.3d 1006, 1010 (9th Cir. 2002) (quoting Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893 (1983)). The court must either issue a certificate of appealability indicating which issues satisfy the required showing or must state the reasons why such a certificate should not issue. Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). For the reasons stated in the October 22, 2009, memorandum decision and order, none of the issues raised by Petitioner meets the statutory standard for issuance of a certificate of appealability.
Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that Petitioner's request for a certificate of appealability is DENIED as to all issues. Petitioner's application to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED as moot without prejudice to refiling the request in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals should that court see fit to issue a certificate of appealability.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.