Dykes v. Ayers
- Susan Illston
- 3:11-cv-04454
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Dykes v. Ayers, Judge Illston ordered briefing on Dykes’s request for a certificate of appealability after finding his initial argument insufficient.
Petitioner Ernest Edward Dykes, whose request for a certificate of appealability required additional briefing; the respondent was given an opportunity to respond.
What happened
In Dykes v. Ayers, the petitioner asked to withdraw claims two through eight of his habeas petition, seek judgment against himself on claim one, and obtain permission to appeal the denial of his discovery request. The respondent took no position on the motion, except to argue that the withdrawn claims should not be available for renewal.
The court found that Dykes’s brief argument did not explain why a certificate of appealability should issue. A certificate requires a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied, including that reasonable judges could debate the court’s decision. The court therefore required additional briefing rather than deciding the request on the existing papers.
Judge Illston ordered Dykes to file a supporting brief by June 15, 2020; the respondent may respond by June 25, and Dykes may reply by July 2. The opinion does not state a disposition of the requests to withdraw claims two through eight or enter judgment on claim one.
The detailed version
- Dykes v. Ayers · No. 3:11-cv-04454
- Susan Illston
- May 21, 2020
Background
The court considered Petitioner Ernest Edward Dykes’s motion to withdraw claims two through eight of his habeas petition, notice an exception to the denial of discovery, request judgment against him on claim one, and request a certificate of appealability. The motion followed the court’s February 20, 2020 order denying Dykes’s first discovery motion and its later order directing the parties to confer and propose a schedule for further litigation.
Dykes asked to withdraw claims two through eight without prejudice, enter judgment against him on claim one, and issue a certificate of appealability so he could appeal the denial of discovery. The respondent took no position on the motion or certificate request, other than asserting that claims two through eight would have to be withdrawn with prejudice to obtain a final, appealable judgment.
Certificate of Appealability
A certificate of appealability is permission to appeal certain rulings in a habeas case. The court explained that it may issue one only if the applicant makes a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied. The applicant must show that reasonable judges could debate whether the petition should have been resolved differently or that the issues deserved further review.
The court found Dykes’s argument insufficient. His motion did not address the applicable standard or explain why he qualified for a certificate. His reply merely asserted that reasonable judges could disagree with the denial of discovery because of the seriousness of the capital habeas matter and the details supporting his discovery motion.
Ruling
The court determined that additional briefing was necessary to fully consider the certificate request. It ordered Dykes to file a supporting brief by June 15, 2020. The respondent may file a response by June 25, 2020, and Dykes may file a reply by July 2, 2020.
The opinion does not state that the court granted or denied Dykes’s requests to withdraw claims two through eight or enter judgment on claim one. It also does not grant the requested certificate of appealability in this order.
Procedural posture
This was an ancillary procedural order concerning discovery and a request for permission to appeal in a habeas case. It did not decide the underlying habeas claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.