Opinion
ORDER SUMMARILY DISMISSING ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY
MARGARET M. MORROW, District Judge.
On June 16, 2015, petitioner Timothy Hobley ("Petitioner"), a California prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus ("Petition"). [Dkt. No. 1.] Notably, it is his second federal petition challenging his 2002 state court conviction and sentence for assault with a deadly weapon, battery, and criminal threats. ( See Pet. at 2, 15, 21.) Thus, the Court finds that the Petition is an unauthorized "second or successive" petition, and summarily dismisses this action without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. 2244(b).
By way of background, Petitioner first challenged his conviction in 2005. ( See C.D. Cal. Case No. LACV 05-4939-RSW (OP), Dkt. No. 1.) That petition was denied. ( See id., Dkt Nos. 25, 31, 32.) Petitioner's Subsequent requests for a Certificate of Appealability were denied by both this Court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. ( See id., Dkt. Nos. 33-35, 40.)
Now, in the instant Petition, Petitioner challenges the same 2002 judgment. (Pet. at 2.) However, Petitioner has failed to obtain the Ninth Circuit's authorization to file a "second or successive" petition. See 28 U.S.C. 2244(b).
Accordingly, the Court must dismiss this action for lack of jurisdiction. See id.
Additionally, for the reasons stated above, the Court finds that Petitioner has not shown that reasonable jurists would find it debatable whether this Court was correct in its procedural ruling. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). The Court thus declines to issue a certificate of appealability.
For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED THAT this action be SUMMARILY DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of jurisdiction, pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT a Certificate of Appealability be DENIED.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.