Arocho v. Secretary, DOC et al (Lee County), No. 2:2016cv00910 - Document 23 (M.D. Fla. 2019)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER denying re: 20 MOTION for certificate of appealability. Signed by Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 7/17/2019. (SLU)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Arocho v. Secretary, DOC et al (Lee County) Doc. 23 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION JULIAN AROCHO, Petitioner, v. Case No.: 2:16-cv-910-FtM-38MRM SECRETARY, DOC and FLORIDA ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondents. / OPINION AND ORDER1 Before the Court is Petitioner Julian Arocho’s Motion for a Certificate of Appealability (Doc. 20) filed on July 15, 2019. Petitioner is not entitled to a certificate of appealability. A prisoner seeking a writ of habeas corpus has no absolute entitlement to appeal a district court’s denial of his petition. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1). Rather, a district court must first issue a certificate of appealability (“COA”). “A [COA] may issue . . . only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). To make such a showing, Petitioner must demonstrate that “reasonable jurists would find the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong,” Tennard v. Dretke, 542 U.S. 274, 282 (2004) (quoting Slack v. 1 Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or websites. These hyperlinks are provided only for users’ convenience. Users are cautioned that hyperlinked documents in CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By allowing hyperlinks to other websites, this Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their websites. Likewise, the Court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their websites. The Court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the Court. Dockets.Justia.com McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)), or that “the issues presented were ‘adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.’” Miller–El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 335–36 (2003). Petitioner has not made the requisite showing in these circumstances. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED: Petitioner Julian Arocho’s Motion for a Certificate of Appealability (Doc. 20) is DENIED. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida this 17th day of July 2019. SA: FTMP-2 Copies: All Parties of Record 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
