Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California adopted the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations and denied Carlos Cervantes’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition with prejudice. The court declined to issue a certificate of appealability, directed entry of judgment, and ordered the case closed.
Holdings
- Habeas relief was unavailable because the petitioner did not show that the state court's decision was contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law as determined by the Supreme Court.
- A certificate of appealability was denied because reasonable jurists would not find the denial of the petition debatable or wrong and the petitioner had not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.
Questions Presented
- Whether the state court's refusal to apply amendments to California Penal Code § 859.5 retroactively violated clearly established federal due process law under AEDPA.
- Whether the petitioner was entitled to a certificate of appealability after denial of the habeas petition on the merits.
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (4)
- People v. Cervantes, 55 Cal. App. 5th 927 (Cal. Ct. App. 2020)(followed)
- Carey v. Musladin, 549 U.S. 70, 77 (2006)(followed)
- Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 327, 335-336, 338 (2003)(followed)
- Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…