Ronald Stevenson v. Jack Palmer et al
Filing
77
ORDER granting in part 72 Motion for Certificate of Appealability. Signed by Judge Brian E. Sandoval on 03/26/09. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LG)
<![CDATA[
7Lq '. 1? . El
l
$ L:ED i '. t
.. 'j.''lj .j' .r-j ) .q . yj y.. j y .j
( Ig.'.TS0 ?CF '2 . ;sl ï 6;' (q C ' F ) .q , E9 J
.-
-
.-
Aa 2: z g gg
1
2
3 4
5
$ l
t
@
u
l L '
t. , ' ,.. 7-, k . 7 . -l V J
.,
.. .1 .. u- - - ) m = s. .. .- .. .
oy
:
' ? 'y 2'; j
orn'r !y
.= . z7X U- . z -u.u. wa K
6 7
8
U N I E D STA T E S D I TR I T C O U R T T S C D I T R I T O F N EV A D A S C
9 RO NA LD ALEX STEVENSO N ,
1 0
1l vs.
Pe ion r ti e , t
Cas No. 06 CV- 05 1 BES-VPC) e 3: - 0 7 (
O R DER
1 J C K PALM ER ,etaI, 2A . 1 3
14
Respondent . s
1 5 Be or t e Cour ar Pe ioner Appl a i n f rCedic t o App albit ( 72 , feh t e ti ' t s i to o c f a e f e a ly # ) i i 1 Res on en s Oppo ion ( 74) an Pet in rs r pl ( 76) To app alt e denilo a 6 p d t' st # , d io e ' e y # . i t eh af
1 petton f ra w rtofhabeas cor us,Pettonerm ustobt i a cediiat ofappeal bit , t r 7 ii o i p ii an fc e a ly afe i
1 makng a ' ub t n il o ig o t e denil fa c n tt t n li h . 28 U. . . 53( ) 8 i ' s a ta sh w n f h s a o o siu i a rg t' o ' S C j22 c .
1 9 W hçr a dititgour ha?r ect dt e constt tgnal ai s on t e e s rc t q' e h iu i cl m h fnd t e dlt ltcoud' ass sjm entoft e constt tonalcl l s i h s rc se h iu l am debat bl or wr ng. The Isue becpm es som ew hat mor Me o s e com pl at d w her , as her ,t e ditlt cour dlm ises t e le c e e h s rc tss h petton bas d On pr cedur lgr unds. W # hol as f l w s: ll # o ao d ol o W hen t e dltitcour denl s p hab:as pettpn on pr cedur l h s rc te li q a gr undswihoutr achig t e prs ners underyl g const u i nal q t e n h lo ' ln l to t 9l l , COA shoul i sue w hqnt e prsonershows, I as , hat qm a ds hi at e t t J rst of r asoq woul fnd I debat bl w het er t e petton uls : di t ae hh ii pt t s a val cl l oft e dçni l a cons iutonalrghtMnd t at qe l am d h a of tt i i h J nst ofr ajoq woul fnd Idebat bl w het ert e dit ltcoud use di t ae h h s rc
-
2 0
21
22
Tept9nrlseeldotsaraoasrihswal melehsomutqmosraiy25()btqifrqd ht,i hwnr urnt etj23cIlprt u: rs t : g d etstf esnseJ so r l p ah g d
23 24 25
26
27
w as corectI ls pr cedur lr l g. r nt o a ui n
28
Slckv Mc a i l529U. . a . D ne , S 473, 4 ( 0 0) s e alo J mesv. ls, F. d 1 7 , 0 7 48 2 0 . e s a , Gi 221 3 0 4 1 7 e 79 ( t Ci. 0) 9 h r 200 .
1
Pettonerdoes notdiput t atG r unds 1 t r ugh 11,i whol ori pad, had not ii s eh o ho n e n
2 b en ex au t d i t e sat c u s. Pet iner Mot n t Dim is( 3 ) Pe io eras e e h se n h t e o d io ' t s i o s s # 4 . t in o t kd
3 f rt e Coud t s ay t i acton whi he r t r ed t t e st t cours. Pettonerhad fl d a oh o t hs i l e eu n o h ae t ii i e
4 p operper on n t e ofap eal r m hi j d men o c n it n. Hi c un elhad fld i r - s oi c p fo s u g t f o vc i o so s in e 5 dititcour amotont aleroramendt ej dgm entofc nviton.Thedititcoud denid src t i ot hu o ci s rc e
6 t e m oton because Pettoners pr perper on notce o appealdeprved t e dititcoud of h i i i 'o-s if i h s rc
7 j r dit n Th Co d f un t a g odc u e di no e it orPet in rsf i r t e h us u i ci . e u o d h t o a s d t xs f so io e ' a l e o x a t t u
8 becaus , e event ough het id t r ie t e i sues i G r unds 1t r ugh 11i a pr perper on h re o a s h s no ho n o-s
9 bref bef r t e Nevada Supr m e Cour ,he cr at d t e pr bl m hi sel, Or er( 3 ) i oe h e t ee h oe mf d # 6. 1 Pettonerdi notchoose w het erhe w ant d t dim i s t i acton t r t r t st t cour or 0 ii d h e o s s hs i o e u n o a e t
11 t di m is t e unexhaust d gr unds,and t e Cour dim i sed t e acton Or er( 7 ) ossh e o h tss h i d # 0. 1 Pettoners i sue on appeali whet ert i Coud shoul have s ayed t i acton t I thi 2 ii ' s s h hs d t hs i o e m
.
l r t r t t e st t couds t exhausthi gr unds. 3 e u n o h ae o so
1 4
The I is of' ood cause't j stf a st y ar notentr l set On one hand,good it ' m g 'o u iy a e iey .
.
1 cause i I sst anan extaor i ar cicum st nce.Jacksonv Ro , 25F.d65 , - 2( t 5 se h r dn y r a e4 3 4 661 6 9 h
1 Ci. 05) Ont e o h rhan , p t in rsic rec as u pt nof t oun el addon 6 r 20 . h t e d a e io e ' n o r t s m i wha c s h t o e
1 i n tgoo c us t j s i a s a . W oo en v Kikand,5 0 F.d 1 1 ,1 23 24 ( t Ci. 7 so d a e o u ty ty f t . rl 4 3 0 9 0 - 9h r 1 20 8) Und r he e crum sanc s, ea onabej rssmi h d ba e t i Coud' c n lson 8 0 . et s i c t e rs l u it g t e t hs s o cu i
1 t atgood cause di notexit 9h d s
.
20
Pet i nerhas subm it d a Suppl m entt Appl aton f rCeriiat ofAppeal bit io t te e o ii o c tc e f a ly i
21 ( 75) He ar u st a hi tilc un el mo in t al roramend t ej dgm en woul n t #, ge ht sr o s ' t o t a so e hu t do
22 have exhaus ed t e gr unds f rr l ft att e Coud det r i ed wer unexhaust d. Fis , tho o ei h h e em n e e rt 23 Local Rul 7- does not aut or e Pettoner t fl a suppl m ent s par t fom hi e2 hi z i i oi e e e ae r s
2 Appl a in ( 72) Sec n ,Pe ion rc nn tr ie n w ar u en sagais dim is l ft i 4 i to # . o d tt e a o as e g m t c i n t s s a o hs
25 acton i a r questf ra cedii at ofappeal bii ,See Cacooer o v Dem os henes,37 P. d ine o fc e a ly t d t 3
.
26 504,507 ( t Ci.1994) 9h r .
27 // /
28 // /
-
2-
l
I I THEREFO RE O R DER ED t at Pettoners Appl aton f r Cediiat of TS h ii ' ii o c fc e
2 Ap ealbit ( 72 i gr nt d ont ef l w ig is e: p a ly # ) s a e i h ol n s u o
3
4
5
'
W het ert e Cour yhoul have st yed t i acton t I tPettonerr t r t t e st t hh t d a hs i o e i i e u n o h ae
couds t exhaus hI avai bl r m edi s. o ts l ee a e DATED : s 26t day ofM ar h, 2009. Thi h c
,
..
6 7
Unied St t s DititJudge t ae s rc
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 l7 18 19 20 21 22
23 24
25 26 27 28
-
3-
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
