Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Sturgeon v. Randolph

June 19, 2007

RONALD W. STURGEON, PETITIONER,
v.
AUSTIN S. RANDOLPH, JR., RESPONDENT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Jeanne E. Scott, U.S. District Judge

OPINION

This matter comes before the Court on Petitioner Ronald W. Sturgeon's: (1) Motion for Leave to Appeal in Forma Pauperis (d/e 7), (2) Motion for a Certificate of Appealability (d/e 6), and (3) Motion for Appointment of Counsel on Appeal (d/e 8). Petitioner has shown himself to be indigent, and so, his request to appeal in forma pauperis will be allowed. His request for appointment of counsel on appeal will be forwarded to the Court of Appeals for its consideration.

The request for a certificate of appealability is denied. This Court dismissed the petition for lack of jurisdiction because Petitioner has not received authorization from the Court of Appeals to file this successive habeas petition. Text Order entered May 24, 2007; 28 U.S.C. § 2253; Section 2254 Rule 9. When such a petition is denied on procedural grounds, a certificate of appealability is appropriate only if the petitioner shows "that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling." Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see 28 U.S.C. 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). . . A reasonable jurist would not find this Court's procedural ruling to be debatable. The Court, therefore, denies his request for a certificate of appealability.

THEREFORE, Petitioner Sturgeon's Motion for Leave to Appeal in Forma Pauperis (d/e 7) is ALLOWED; and his Motion for a Certificate of Appealability (d/e 6) is DENIED. His Motion for Appointment of Counsel (d/e 8) is referred to the Court of Appeals. The Clerk is directed to forward this Motion to the Court of Appeals for its consideration.

IT IS THEREFORE SO ORDERED.

JEANNE E. SCOTT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

20070619

© 1992-2007 VersusLaw ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.