Inostroz v. Eldridge ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 MIGUEL CARDONA INOSTROZ, Case No. 17-cv-05577-HSG 8 Petitioner, ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY; DENYING LEAVE 9 v. TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON APPEAL 10 LAURA ELDRIDGE,1 Re: Dkt. Nos. 18, 20, 22 11 Respondent. 12 13 Petitioner, a pro se prisoner, filed this action for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 14 U.S.C. § 2254. On January 21, 2020, the Court denied the habeas petition, denied a certificate of 15 appealability and entered judgment in favor of respondent. Dkt. Nos. 11, 12. Now pending before 16 the Court are petitioner’s requests for a certificate of appealability (Dkt. Nos. 20, 22) and 17 petitioner’s request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal (Dkt. No. 18). A certificate 18 of appealability is DENIED for the same reasons set forth in the Court’s January 21, 2020 order 19 denying the habeas petition. Petitioner has not made a substantial showing that a reasonable jurist 20 would find the denial of his petition debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 21 (2000). Because the Court has denied a certificate of appealability, the Court will also deny leave 22 to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. Dkt. No. 18. The Clerk shall process the appeal and 23 forward a copy of this order to the United States Court of Appeals. 24 // 25 // 26 // 27 1 This order terminates Dkt. Nos. 18, 20, 22. 2 IT IS SO ORDERED. 3 || Dated: 4/29/2020 / ‘ HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. 5 United States District Judge 6 7 8 9 10 11 a 12 14 15 16 = 17 Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28