From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Blackwell v. Hickman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Feb 11, 2013
No. 2:06-cv-1876 RRB GGH P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 11, 2013)

Opinion

No. 2:06-cv-1876 RRB GGH P No. 2:10-cv-2316 RRB GGH P

02-11-2013

ANTHONY M. BLACKWELL, Petitioner, v. RODERICK Q. HICKMAN, Respondent. ANTHONY M. BLACKWELL, Petitioner, v. JAMES WALKER, Respondent.


ORDER

Petitioner in both cases, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has timely filed a notice of appeal of this court's September 12, 2012 denial of his application for a writ of habeas corpus. Before petitioner can appeal this decision, a certificate of appealability must issue. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b).

A certificate of appealability may issue under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 "only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). 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 set forth in the magistrate judge's September 12, 2012 findings and recommendations, petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Accordingly, a certificate of appealability should not issue in this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 11th day of February, 2013.

RALPH R. BEISTLINE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Blackwell v. Hickman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Feb 11, 2013
No. 2:06-cv-1876 RRB GGH P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 11, 2013)
Case details for

Blackwell v. Hickman

Case Details

Full title:ANTHONY M. BLACKWELL, Petitioner, v. RODERICK Q. HICKMAN, Respondent…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Feb 11, 2013

Citations

No. 2:06-cv-1876 RRB GGH P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 11, 2013)