JAMARIO KATO v. DARREL VANNOY WARDEN LOUISIANA STATE PENITENTIARY (2017)

ORDER:

Jamario Kato, Louisiana prisoner # 595850, seeks a certificate of appealability (COA) to appeal the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition challenging his convictions and sentences for second degree murder and attempted armed robbery. Kato contends that prosecutors failed to disclose the fact that the sole eyewitness to the crime had been coerced by a retired police officer into falsely identifying him as one of the perpetrators. See Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 87 (1963).

To obtain a COA, Kato must make “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). In order to satisfy that burden, he must “sho[w] that reasonable jurists could debate whether (or, for that matter, agree that) the petition should have been resolved in a different manner or that the issues presented were adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). Kato may do so by showing that “reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong.” Id.

Kato fails to make the requisite showing. He has not presented evidence showing that the prosecution knew of any allegedly coerced or false testimony. And our court does not recognize freestanding claims of innocence in the section 2254 context. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the motion for a COA is DENIED.

GREGG J. COSTA UNITED STATES CIRCUIT JUDGE