Opinion
2:21-cv-1038 AC P
06-30-2021
KAYVAN MOHAMMAD OSKUIE, Petitioner, v. ATASCADERO STATE HOSPITAL, Respondent.
ORDER
ALLISON CLAIRE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The undersigned screened the original petition and found that it did not state any cognizable claims for relief. ECF No. 5. Petitioner was given an opportunity to file an amended petition and has now done so. ECF No. 7.
In screening the original petition, the undersigned found that it was unclear whether petitioner, who is currently confined at Atascadero State Hospital, was attempting to challenge his underlying conviction, his confinement under California Penal Code § 2962, or some other aspect of his conviction or sentence. It appears from the amended petition that petitioner is attempting to challenge his underlying conviction. ECF No. 7. However, the petition states only that petitioner's conviction was obtained “by use of coerced confession” and “by use of evidence pursuant to an unlawful arrest.” Id. at 4. Both the instructions on the petition form and the order screening the complaint advised petitioner that such broad statements are insufficient to state claims for relief. He must provide specific facts related to the alleged violations.
Petitioner's letter accompanying the amended petition does little to clarify the grounds for his claims. ECF No. 8. Instead, it makes only general allegations and directs the court to his “chart overview” and states that the court will find his claims by looking carefully “through the history of case.” Id. at 1-2. The documents from petitioner's state case are not currently before this court, and even if they were, it is not the court's responsibility to search through petitioner's files to determine what grounds for relief he may be able to state. Instead, it is petitioner's obligation to provide the court with the facts he believes show a violation of his constitutional rights.
Petitioner will be given one final opportunity to amend the petition. The amended petition must include specific facts, such as an explanation as to why he believes his confession was coerced and what evidence was unlawfully obtained. Continued failure to provide the court with specific facts about the claims petitioner is attempting to make will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed for failure to state a cognizable claim.
In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. For the reasons set forth above, the amended application for writ of habeas corpus will not be served.
2. Within thirty days from the date of this order, petitioner may file a second amended petition for writ of habeas corpus.
3. Any amended petition must bear the case number assigned to this action and the title “Amended Petition.” Failure to file an amended petition will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed.
4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send petitioner the court's form for application for writ of habeas corpus.