Castro-Davis v. USA, No. 3:2013cv01662 - Document 18 (D.P.R. 2014)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION denying [] Motion for Certificate of Appealability. Signed by Judge Jose A. Fuste on 05/05/2014. (mrj)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO 1 2 3 4 FELIX ALBERTO CASTRO-DAVIS, Petitioner, Civil No. 13-1662 (JAF) v. (Crim. No. 07-186-1) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. 5 6 MEMORANDUM OPINION 7 On April 28, 2014, Felix Alberto Castro-Davis ( Castro-Davis ) filed a motion for 8 certificate of appealability. He contests our dismissal of his motion to vacate, set aside, or 9 correct his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. (Docket No. 17.) 10 On March 18, 2014, we issued an opinion and order denying nearly all the claims 11 that Castro-Davis alleged in his 2255 motion. (Docket No. 7.) On April 23 and April 24, 12 2014, we held an evidentiary hearing regarding Castro-Davis contention that he received 13 ineffective assistance of counsel during plea discussions. (Docket Nos. 13, 14.) On 14 April 25, 2014, we issued a supplemental opinion, denying his final claim. We found 15 that Castro-Davis claims had no credible basis on the developed record and we 16 dismissed the case in its entirety. (Docket Nos. 15, 16.) 17 In accordance with Rule 11 of the Rules Governing § 2255 Proceedings, when we 18 issued this denial of § 2255 relief, we concurrently determined whether to issue a 19 certificate of appealability ( COA ). We grant a COA only upon a substantial showing 20 of the denial of a constitutional right. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). To make this showing, 21 [t]he petitioner must demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's 22 assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong. Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 Civil No. 13-1662 (JAF) -2- 1 U.S. 322, 338 (2003) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)). At the 2 time, we saw no way in which a reasonable jurist could find our assessment of Castro- 3 Davis constitutional claims debatable or wrong. (Docket No. 15.) 4 5 We still find no way in which a reasonable jurist could find our assessment incorrect, and we deny Castro-Davis a certificate of appealability. 6 V. 7 Conclusion 8 9 For the foregoing reasons, we hereby DENY Petitioner s motion for a certificate of appealability (Docket No. 1). 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. 11 San Juan, Puerto Rico, this 5th day of May, 2014. 12 13 14 S/José Antonio Fusté JOSE ANTONIO FUSTE U. S. DISTRICT JUDGE

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.