From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Washington v. Jaime

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Mar 26, 2019
No. 2:19-cv-0319 KJN P (E.D. Cal. Mar. 26, 2019)

Opinion

No. 2:19-cv-0319 KJN P

03-26-2019

JAMES C. WASHINGTON, Petitioner, v. GEORGE JAIME, Respondent.


ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with a request to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

Examination of the in forma pauperis affidavit reveals that petitioner is unable to afford the costs of suit. Accordingly, the request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).

The court's records reveal that petitioner has previously filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus attacking the conviction and sentence challenged in this case. The previous application was filed on July 14, 2016, and was dismissed as untimely on July 14, 2017. The dismissal of a habeas petition as untimely "constitutes an adjudication on the merits that renders future petitions under § 2254 challenging the same conviction 'second or successive' petitions under § 2244(b)." McNabb v. Yates, 576 F.3d 1028, 1030 (9th Cir. 2009).

Before petitioner can proceed with the instant application, he must move in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for an order authorizing the district court to consider the application. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3). Therefore, petitioner's application must be dismissed without prejudice to its re-filing upon obtaining authorization from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner's application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF Nos. 5, 8) is granted; and

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to assign a district judge to this case; and

IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). Dated: March 26, 2019

/s/_________

KENDALL J. NEWMAN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE /wash0319.succ


Summaries of

Washington v. Jaime

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Mar 26, 2019
No. 2:19-cv-0319 KJN P (E.D. Cal. Mar. 26, 2019)
Case details for

Washington v. Jaime

Case Details

Full title:JAMES C. WASHINGTON, Petitioner, v. GEORGE JAIME, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Mar 26, 2019

Citations

No. 2:19-cv-0319 KJN P (E.D. Cal. Mar. 26, 2019)