Opinion
Civil Action No. 19-24560-Civ-Scola
04-14-2020
Order Denying Motion for Certificate of Appealability
Plaintiff Guillermo Quinones filed his "Appellate Request Permission/Leave to File a Delayed Appeal," which the Court construes as a motion for a certificate of appealability. (Mot., ECF No. 9.) The motion purports to seek leave to appeal this Court's January 16, 2020 Order denying a motion for reconsideration of the Court's November 12, 2019 dismissal of this case. (See Order Den. Recons., ECF No. 7; Order Dismissing Case, ECF No. 5.)
Upon review of the record, the Court finds that the Plaintiff is not entitled to a certificate of appealability. A certificate of appealability 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). This standard is satisfied when "reasonable jurists could debate whether (or, for that matter, agree that) the petition should have been resolved in a different manner." Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). As this Court previously observed, the Plaintiff has already filed various petitions for postconviction relief, each of which was denied and affirmed on appeal. (ECF No. 5 (citing Case Nos. 01-cv-02615-FAM and 08-cv-22723-FAM).) Since that time, the Plaintiff filed this lawsuit, which the Court has dismissed as frivolous. The Plaintiff's untimely motion fails to present issues that "reasonable jurists could debate." Slack, 529 U.S. at 484; see also Daniels v. United States, 2017 WL 4250714, *1 (11th Cir. Apr. 17, 2017) ("reasonable jurists would not debate the district court's denial of [the petitioner's] construed Rule 59(e) motion, and, thus, her motion for a certificate of appealability in that matter is also denied."). Consequently, this Court denies the Plaintiff's motion for Certificate of Appealability (ECF No. 9).
Done and ordered, in chambers at Miami, Florida, on April 14, 2020.
/s/_________
Robert N. Scola, Jr.
United States District Judge