Free Order on Motion for Certificate of Appealability - District Court of California - California

Case 3:07-cv-04269-TEH

Document 12

Filed 03/19/2008

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 v. ROBERT HOREL,

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GREGORY WILLIAMS, Petitioner, NO. C07-4269 TEH ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY Respondent.

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

Petitioner Gregory Williams's request for a certificate of appealability is GRANTED

12 IN PART and DENIED IN PART. A certificate of appealability may issue where the 13 petitioner "has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. 14 § 2253(c)(2). A petitioner satisfies this standard where he or she shows that reasonable 15 jurists could find the issues debatable or that the issues are "adequate to deserve 16 encouragement to proceed further." Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483-84 (2000) 17 (quoting Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893 n.4 (1983)). 18 The Court finds this standard to have been satisfied as to Petitioner's first and second

19 claims regarding, respectively, a claim under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), and a 20 claim involving the voluntariness of Petitioner's statements to police. The Court therefore 21 GRANTS a certificate of appealability as to these two claims. 22 As to Petitioner's remaining claims, the Court DENIES a certificate of appealability

23 because Petitioner has not satisfied the governing standard. This Court does not find that 24 reasonable jurists could find the issues relating to Petitioner's third through fifth claims to be 25 debatable, nor are the arguments raised adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed 26 further. Accordingly, the Clerk shall forward the case file to the court of appeals with this 27 order. Ninth Cir. R. 22-1(b). Petitioner is reminded that "the court of appeals will not 28 consider uncertified issues unless petitioner first seeks, and the court of appeals grants,

Case 3:07-cv-04269-TEH

Document 12

Filed 03/19/2008

Page 2 of 2

1 broader certification. Petitioners desiring broader certification must file, in the court of 2 appeals, a separate motion for broader certification, along with a statement of reasons why a 3 certificate should be granted as to any issues(s) within thirty-five days of the district court's 4 entry of its order denying a certificate of appealability." Ninth Cir. R. 22-1(d). 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 8 Dated: 03/19/08 9 10 THELTON E. HENDERSON, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2