No. 23-629

DeAndre Gordon v. Harold May, Warden

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2023-12-11
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Amici (1)Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2) Experienced Counsel
Tags: 28-usc-2253 appellate-procedure certificate-of-appealability circuit-court-split constitutional-rights habeas-corpus judicial-review standard-of-review
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus Punishment
Latest Conference: 2024-04-12 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether a Certificate of Appealability must issue when a circuit judge votes to grant one

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTION PRESENTED A state prisoner whose federal habeas petition is denied by a district court can appeal only if he obtains a Certificate of Appealability (COA), which requires “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). “At the COA stage,” this Court has long and repeatedly held that “the only question is whether the applicant has shown that ‘jurists of reason could disagree with the district court’s resolution of his constitutional claims or that jurists could conclude the issues presented are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.” Buck v. Davis, 580 U.S. 100, 115 (2018) (quoting Miller—El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 327 (2008)). Despite this Court’s clear requirement that a COA issue when any reasonable jurist could disagree with the district court or conclude that the issues warrant further review, the circuit courts are deeply divided on whether, under that standard, a COA must issue if a circuit judge votes to grant one. The Third, Fourth, and Seventh Circuits, by rule, have established that a COA must be granted when any circuit judge votes that the claims deserve appellate evaluation. But the Sixth Circuit panel here denied petitioner a COA over the dissent of a colleague, following the standard established in published authority from the Fifth, Eighth, and Eleventh Circuits. The question presented is: Since a Certificate of Appealability must be granted when reasonable jurists could disagree on the resolution of a constitutional claim or conclude the issues presented are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further, must a COA issue when a circuit judge votes to grant one?

Docket Entries

2024-04-15
Petition DENIED.
2024-03-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/12/2024.
2024-03-18
2024-03-01
2024-02-02
Brief amicus curiae of National Association for Public Defense filed.
2024-01-09
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including March 4, 2024.
2024-01-08
Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 2, 2024 to March 4, 2024, submitted to The Clerk.
2024-01-03
Response Requested. (Due February 2, 2024)
2023-12-27
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/12/2024.
2023-12-22
Waiver of right of respondent Harold May to respond filed.
2023-12-22
Letter to the Clerk from counsel for DeAndre Gordon submitted.
2023-12-07
2023-10-02
Application (23A288) granted by Justice Kavanaugh extending the time to file until December 7, 2023.
2023-09-28
Application (23A288) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from October 8, 2023 to December 7, 2023, submitted to Justice Kavanaugh.

Attorneys

DeAndre Gordon
Daniel Hirotsu WoofterGoldstein, Russell & Woofter LLC, Petitioner
Daniel Hirotsu WoofterGoldstein, Russell & Woofter LLC, Petitioner
Harold May
Michael Jason HendershotOhio Attorney General's Office, Respondent
Michael Jason HendershotOhio Attorney General's Office, Respondent
National Association for Public Defense
John Paul Schnapper-CasterasSchnapper-Casteras PLLC, Amicus
John Paul Schnapper-CasterasSchnapper-Casteras PLLC, Amicus