From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pickering v. McDonald

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION
May 3, 2013
No. ED CV 12-01045-JVS (VBK) (C.D. Cal. May. 3, 2013)

Opinion

No. ED CV 12-01045-JVS (VBK)

05-03-2013

AUBREY MICHAEL PICKERING, Petitioner, v. McDONALD, Respondent.


ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES

MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636, the Court has reviewed the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus ("Petition"), the records and files herein, and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge ("Report").

IT IS ORDERED that: (1) the Court accepts the findings and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge, and (2) the Court declines to issue a Certificate of Appealability ("COA").

Under 28 U.S.C. §2253(c)(2), a COA may issue "only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." The Supreme Court has held that, to obtain a Certificate of Appealability under §2253(c), a habeas petitioner must show that "reasonable jurists could debate whether (or, for that matter, agree that) the petition should have been resolved in a different manner or that the issues presented were 'adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further'." Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483-84, 120 S.Ct. 1595 (2000)(internal quotation marks omitted); see also Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336, 123 S.Ct. 1029 (2003). After review of Petitioner's contentions herein, this Court concludes that Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, as is required to support the issuance of a COA.

_________________

JAMES V. SELNA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Pickering v. McDonald

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION
May 3, 2013
No. ED CV 12-01045-JVS (VBK) (C.D. Cal. May. 3, 2013)
Case details for

Pickering v. McDonald

Case Details

Full title:AUBREY MICHAEL PICKERING, Petitioner, v. McDONALD, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION

Date published: May 3, 2013

Citations

No. ED CV 12-01045-JVS (VBK) (C.D. Cal. May. 3, 2013)

Citing Cases

Contreras v. Davis

Still, a federal habeas petition must comply with Rule 2 of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases which arguably…