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.

United States of America v. Armando Cardon-Cortez

December 22, 2011

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v.
ARMANDO CARDON-CORTEZ, DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Roger VINSON Senior United States District Judge

ORDER

This cause is before the court upon defendant's notice of appeal, construed as a motion for certificate of appealability (doc. 228). Defendant is appealing this court's denial of his motions for leave to appeal in forma pauperis and motion for appointment of counsel. (Doc. 215)

This court must determine whether a certificate of appealability is appropriate for any of the issues defendant seeks to raise in his appeal of the denial of his motions for leave to appeal in forma pauperis and motion for appointment of counsel. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (providing that a certificate of appealability may issue "only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right"). Here, the order defendant seeks to appeal (doc. 215) is not final and therefore is not appealable. Moreover, defendant does not identify the grounds on which he wishes to challenge the Order (doc. 215) denying the subject motions. The court finds that defendant is not entitled to the issuance of a certificate of appealability.

To obtain a certificate of appealability under § 2253(c), "a habeas prisoner must make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right . . . ." Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483-84 (2000). For the reasons outlined in the Magistrate Judge's Order (doc. 215) denying the motions for leave to appeal in forma pauperis and motion for appointment of counsel, the court concludes that defendant has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED: Defendant's motion for certificate of appealability (doc. 228) is DENIED.

Roger Vinson

20111222

© 1992-2011 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.