Free Certificate of Appealability - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Dora B. Schriro, et al., 13 Respondents. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Petitioner has filed a notice of appeal and a "Request for a Certificate of Appealability" ("COA"). (Dkt. 185, 186.) Respondents take no position on Petitioner's request for a certificate of appealability. Petitioner was convicted of murder and sentenced to death in state court. Following direct appeal and post-conviction review, Petitioner filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in this Court. Pursuant to Roper v. Simmons, 125 S. Ct. 1183 (2005), because of Petitioner's status as a juvenile at the time of his offense, he became entitled to, and was provided, habeas relief from his death sentence. (Dkt. 182.) On the merits of Petitioner's remaining conviction claims, the Court denied habeas relief. Petitioner first requests a COA on the merits of Claims 1, 2, 3 and 14. Next, he seeks for a COA on Claims 17, 19, 20 and 23, which were determined to be procedurally barred. Next, he seeks a COA regarding the Court's ruling denying him discovery in order to meet his burden of showing cause and prejudice and to
Case 2:00-cv-02410-JAT Document 188 Filed 08/04/2005 Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Kenneth Jeremy Laird, Petitioner, vs.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. CV-00-2410-PHX-JAT

ORDER GRANTING, IN PART, CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

further support certain allegations before the Court. Finally, he seeks a COA regarding the Court's ruling denying him an evidentiary hearing on Claim 14. DISCUSSION Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1), an appeal may be taken when the District Court has issued a certificate of appealability ("COA"). A COA may issue when the petitioner "has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." Id. (c)(2); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). The court issuing the COA must determine "which specific issue or issues" meet this standard. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(3). Rule 22(b) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, provides that when an appeal is taken by a habeas corpus petitioner, the district judge who rendered the judgment "shall" either issue a COA or state the reasons why such a certificate should not issue. Fed.R.App.P. 22(b). When a court denies habeas relief on procedural grounds, the determination whether to issue a COA requires an additional step. Specifically, petitioner must show that reasonable jurists could debate (1) whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right, and (2) whether the court's procedural ruling was correct. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484. In Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003), the Court clarified COA standards for petitions resolved under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 ("AEDPA"). The Court looks to the application of the AEDPA to petitioner's claims and asks whether that resolution was debatable amongst jurists of reason. Id. The Court has considered Petitioner's motion for a certificate of appealability. Based upon the Court's review, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED granting, in part, and denying, in part, Petitioner's request for a certificate of appealability. (Dkt. 186.) As discussed in the March 30, 2005, Order, the Court certifies Claims 1, 2, 3 and 14 for appealability. (Dkt. 182 at 16-21.) Further, the Court certifies its March 31, 2004, ruling regarding Petitioner's request for an evidentiary hearing for Claim 14. (Dkt. 163 at 22-25.) IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying certification for Claim 17 for the reasons stated in its March 31, 2004, ruling (Dkt. 163 at 14); denying certification for Claims 19, 20, - 2 Case 2:00-cv-02410-JAT Document 188 Filed 08/04/2005 Page 2 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

and 23 for the reasons stated in its March 30, 2005, ruling (Dkt. 182 at 9-13); and denying certification of the Court's ruling which denied Petitioner discovery in order to attempt to meet his burden of showing cause and prejudice (Dkt. 182 at 13.). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court forward a copy of this Order together with Petitioner's Notice of Appeal to the Clerk of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. DATED this 3rd day of August, 2005.

- 3 Case 2:00-cv-02410-JAT Document 188 Filed 08/04/2005 Page 3 of 3