Opinion
Case No. 2:14-cv-01342-GMN-CWH
09-14-2015
GEORGE LESLIE VONTRESS, Petitioner, v. D.W. NEVENS, et al., Respondents.
ORDER
On May 13, 2015, this court denied petitioner's motion for reconsideration of the order dismissing this petition for writ of habeas corpus (#15). The order also denied petitioner's motion to disqualify judge and motion for clarification. Id. In order to proceed with an appeal, petitioner must receive a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1); Fed. R. App. P. 22; 9th Cir. R. 22-1; Allen v. Ornoski, 435 F.3d 946, 950-51 (9th Cir. 2006); see also United States v. Mikels, 236 F.3d 550, 551-52 (9th Cir. 2001). Generally, a petitioner must make "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right" to warrant a certificate of appealability. Id.; 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483-84 (2000). "The petitioner must demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong." Id. (quoting Slack, 529 U.S. at 484). In order to meet this threshold inquiry, the petitioner has the burden of demonstrating that the issues are debatable among jurists of reason; that a court could resolve the issues differently; or that the questions are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further. Id. This court has considered the issues raised by petitioner, with respect to whether they satisfy the standard for issuance of a certificate of appealability, and determines that none meet that standard. The court will therefore deny petitioner a certificate of appealability.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that petitioner is DENIED A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY.
Dated this 14th day of September, 2015.
/s/_________
Gloria M. Navarro, Chief Judge
United States District Court