Opinion
Case No. 2:05-cv-351.
June 29, 2006
OPINION AND ORDER
On December 21, 2005, final judgment was entered dismissing the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 because petitioner failed to comply with the Court's April 7, 2005, order directing him to either pay the $5.00 filing fee for initiating a habeas corpus action or submit a request to proceed in forma pauperis, and to file a petition that clearly set forth his claims for relief. This matter is now before the Court on petitioner's January 30, 2006, notice of appeal, which this Court construes as a request for a certificate of appealability. Doc. No. 10. For the reasons that follow, petitioner's request for a certificate of appealability is DENIED.
Where the Court dismisses a claim on procedural grounds, a certificate of appealability
should issue when the prisoner shows, at least, that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling.Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483 (2000). Thus, there are two components to determining whether a certificate of appealability should issue when a claim is dismissed on procedural grounds: "one directed at the underlying constitutional claims and one directed at the district court's procedural holding." The court may first "resolve the issue whose answer is more apparent from the record and arguments." Id.
Petitioner has failed to establish that either that the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right or that reasonable jurists would find it debatable whether the Court was correct in dismissing this action. Petitioner's request for a certificate of appealability therefore is DENIED.
It is so ORDERED.