Gomez v. Sullivan
- Susan Illston
- 3:19-cv-06129
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Gomez v. Sullivan, Judge Illston granted more time to appeal but denied a certificate of appealability.
The order affected petitioner Elroy Pedro Gomez by extending his appeal deadline while denying a certificate of appealability; it also directed notice to his possible attorney and respondent’s counsel.
What happened
Gomez v. Sullivan involved the petitioner’s request for more time to appeal an earlier order denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The opinion also addressed his request for a certificate of appealability, which is required for an appeal in this type of case.
The court granted the request for more time and required the petitioner to file a notice of appeal within 14 days of this order. The court denied the certificate of appealability for both the earlier habeas ruling and the order denying appointment of counsel, while allowing the petitioner to seek a certificate from the Court of Appeals.
Judge Susan Illston issued the order on December 18, 2020. The court also noted uncertainty about whether an attorney represented the petitioner and directed the clerk to send the order to both the petitioner and the attorney.
The detailed version
- Gomez v. Sullivan · No. 3:19-cv-06129
- Susan Illston
- Dec. 18, 2020
Background
The petitioner, Elroy Pedro Gomez, filed requests seeking (1) an extension of the deadline to file a notice of appeal from the court’s October 16, 2020 order denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus and (2) a certificate of appealability. The opinion describes Gomez as proceeding without a lawyer in connection with the filings, but it also notes that the record was unclear about whether attorney Such represented him.
Rulings
The court granted the request for an extension of the appeal deadline. Gomez was required to file a notice of appeal from the October 16 order no later than 14 days after the December 18 order. The court stated that this deadline could not be extended further.
The court denied Gomez’s request for a certificate of appealability. It found that a certificate would not issue for the October 16 order because reasonable judges would not debate whether the court’s assessment of the constitutional claims was wrong. It also found that a certificate would not issue for the October 20, 2020 order denying appointment of counsel. The denial of the certificate was expressly without prejudice to Gomez seeking one from the United States Court of Appeals.
Other Direction
Because the record was confused about whether Gomez was represented, the clerk was directed to send the order to Gomez, who was in prison, to attorney Such, and to counsel for the respondent.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.