Opinion
2:22-cv-00704-JAD-VCF
10-31-2022
EDDIE RENCHER, JR., Petitioner v. GARRETT, et al., Respondents
ORDER DISMISSING PETITION AS SECOND AND SUCCESSIVE
Jennifer A. Dorsey U.S. District Judge
On August 31, 2022, I directed Eddie Rencher, Jr. to show cause why the court should not dismiss his pro se 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for writ of habeas corpus petition as second or successive to Rencher v. Williams, et al. In response, Rencher filed what he styled as a motion showing good cause. But his filing only sets forth three claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; he does not address whether his petition is second and successive. Rencher has already acknowledged that he previously challenged this judgment of conviction in this court in Rencher I. As I explained previously, before filing a second or successive petition in this court, Rencher needed to first obtain authorization from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. As he has not shown that his petition is not successive or that he received authorization from the Ninth Circuit to file a successive petition, I must dismiss it.
ECF No. 7; Case No. 2:12-cv-01258-APG-GWF (D. Nev. Mar. 31, 2017) (“Rencher I”).
ECF No. 9.
Id.
See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to FILE the petition [ECF No. 1-1].
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petition is DISMISSED as second and successive.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner's motion showing good cause [ECF No. 9] is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no certificate of appealability will issue.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk is directed to ENTER JUDGMENT accordingly and CLOSE THIS CASE.