Nguon v. Madden

United States District Court for the Southern District of California

Nguon v. Madden

Trial Court Opinion

1 2 3 4

5 6 7

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 HUNG DUONG NGUON, Case No.: 22cv181-JO-JLB 11 ORDER DENYING 12 CERTIFICATE OF Petitioner, APPEALABILITY 13 v. 14 RAYMOND MADDEN, Warden, 15

16 Respondent. 17 18 Pro se Petitioner Hung Duong Nguon filed a habeas corpus petition under 28

19 U.S.C. § 2254

on February 6, 2022. Dkt. 1. On February 7, 2023, Magistrate Judge 20 Burkhardt issued a Report and Recommendation (the “R&R”) recommending that the 21 petition be dismissed. Dkt. 18. On February 24, 2023, Petitioner Nguon filed an objection 22 to the R&R, primarily on the grounds of judicial bias. Dkt. 20. On March 20, 2023, the 23 Court adopted the R&R and denied the petition. Dkt. 22. Petitioner timely filed a notice 24 of appeal of the Court’s denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, see Dkt. 24, which 25 the Court construes as a request for a certificate of appealability. United States v. Asrar, 26

116 F.3d 1268, 1270

(9th Cir. 1997). For the reasons stated below, the Court denies the 27 request. 28 l The Court denies Petitioner’s request for a certificate of appealability because he has 2 ||not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. A petitioner may not 3 ||seek an appeal of a claim arising out of state court detention unless the petitioner first 4 || obtains a certificate of appealability from a district judge or a circuit judge under 28 U.S.C. 5 2253. Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). A certificate of appealability will issue only if the petitioner 6 || makes a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.

28 U.S.C. § 2253

(c)(1); 7 || Slack v. McDaniel,

529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000). For the reasons described in the R&R and 8 || this Court’s March 20, 2023 order, Petitioner has not demonstrated that “reasonable jurists 9 || would find the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong.” 10 || Slack,

529 U.S. at 484

. Accordingly, the Court will not issue a certificate of appealability. 11 For the reasons discussed above, the Court DENIES Petitioner’s request for a 12 || certificate of appealability [Dkt. 24]. The Clerk shall forward to the Court of Appeals the 13 || case file with this order. See Asrar,

116 F.3d at 1270

. 14 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. 16 17 || Dated: June 20, 2023 18 19 20 7Jinsook Ohta 21 United States District Judge 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Reference

Status
Unknown