Opinion
No. C 16-1039 JSW (PR)
05-03-2016
WILLIE PAUL VIGIL, Petitioner, v. DAVE DAVEY, Warden, Respondent.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL; GRANTING LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
(Docket Nos. 2, 10)
Petitioner, a prisoner of the State of California proceeding pro se, has filed a habeas corpus petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his conviction in Santa Clara County Superior Court in 1998 for failing to register as a sex offender. Petitioner challenged this same conviction in a prior petition filed in this court, Vigil v. Garcia, No. 02-1490 MJJ (PR), which was denied on its merits. Petitioner has been informed on prior occasions that in he must first obtain from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit an order authorizing this Court to consider a second or successive petition from him. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). That is still the case. He has not indicated that he has received such authorization.
Accordingly, the petition is DISMISSED without prejudice to filing his claims in a new case after he has obtained the necessary authorization from the United States Court of Appeals. In light of this dismissal, Petitioner's motion for an evidentiary hearing is DENIED.
Petitioner's request to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED.
Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases requires a district court to rule on whether a Petitioner is entitled to a certificate of appealability in the same order in which the petition is decided. No reasonable jurist would find this Court's denial of his claim on procedural grounds debatable or wrong. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Consequently, no certificate of appealability is warranted in this case.
The Clerk shall enter judgment and close the file.
IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: May 3, 2016
/s/_________
JEFFREY S. WHITE
United States District Judge
See Vigil v.Yates, No. 07-2061 MJJ (PR); Vigil v. Yates, No. 07-5288 MJJ (PR); Vigil v. Yates, No. 09-0704 JF(PR)