Johnson v. Ryan et al

Filing 3

ORDER - Petitioner's 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and this action aredismissed without prejudice, and the Clerk of Court must enter judgment accordingly. The Clerk of Court must provide Petitioner with a copy of the form recommended b y the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for filing an Application for Leave to File Second or Successive Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 or Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, in t he event Petitioner files an appeal, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability because reasonable jurists would not find the Court's procedural ruling debatable. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 12/02/2015. (ATD)

Download PDF
1 2 MDR WO 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Benjamin Johnson, 10 No. CV 15-02383-PHX-DGC (BSB) Petitioner, 11 v. 12 Charles Ryan, et al., ORDER 13 Respondents. 14 15 Petitioner Benjamin Johnson, who is confined in the Arizona State Prison 16 Complex-Tucson in Tucson, Arizona, has filed a pro se Petition for Writ of Habeas 17 Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1) and has paid the filing fee. The Court will 18 dismiss the Petition without prejudice. 19 I. Background 20 In his first state court trial in Maricopa County Superior Court, case #CR 1994- 21 010138, Petitioner was convicted of attempted murder (Count 1), two counts of 22 aggravated assault of police officers (Counts 2 and 3), and six counts of aggravated 23 assault of bystanders (Counts 4-9). On appeal, the Arizona Court of Appeals reversed the 24 convictions on Counts 1 and 4-9, and left intact the convictions on Counts 2 and 3. 25 At his second trial, Petitioner was retried on the six aggravated assaults of the 26 bystanders and was convicted of five of the six counts. On appeal, the Arizona Court of 27 Appeals reversed these convictions. 28 .... 1 In his third trial, Petitioner was retried on five of the six aggravated assaults of the 2 bystanders and was convicted of all five counts. The Arizona Court of Appeals affirmed, 3 and the Arizona Supreme Court denied review. Petitioner’s state-court post-conviction 4 claims were denied by the trial court, and the state court of appeals and state supreme 5 court both denied review. 6 On November 24, 2008, Petitioner filed his first petition for a writ of habeas 7 corpus regarding his convictions, Johnson v. Bartos, CV 08-02167-PHX-JWS. In a 8 March 9, 2011 Order (Doc. 26 in CV 08-02167), the Court granted Petitioner habeas 9 relief regarding his conviction on Count 3, denied relief on his second ground for relief, 10 and dismissed with prejudice his third ground for relief. The Clerk of Court entered 11 Judgment accordingly. (Doc. 27 in CV 08-02167). Petitioner filed a Notice of Appeal, 12 but the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals declined to issue a certificate of appealability. 13 (Doc. 32 in CV 08-02167). 14 In his current Petition, Petitioner claims violations of the Fifth Amendment 15 prohibition against double jeopardy regarding the convictions for aggravated assault of 16 the bystanders. 17 II. Dismissal of the Petition 18 Under 28 U.S.C. § 2244, a petitioner may not file a second or successive § 2254 19 petition in the district court unless the petitioner has obtained a certification from the 20 Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals authorizing the district court to consider the second or 21 subsequent § 2254 petition. A habeas petition is “‘second or successive’ if it raises 22 claims that were or could have been adjudicated on their merits in an earlier petition.” 23 Cooper v. Calderon, 274 F.3d 1270, 1273 (9th Cir. 2001) (per curiam). The current 24 petition is Petitioner’s second petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging these 25 convictions, and asserts claims that could have been raised in his first petition. 26 Petitioner has not presented a certification from the Ninth Circuit authorizing the 27 Court to consider a second or subsequent § 2254 petition. Accordingly, the current 28 Petition and this action must be dismissed as a successive petition. The Court, however, -2- 1 will dismiss the case without prejudice so that Petitioner can seek certification from the 2 Ninth Circuit to file a second or successive § 2254 petition. 3 IT IS ORDERED: 4 5 6 (1) Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) and this action are dismissed without prejudice, and the Clerk of Court must enter judgment accordingly. (2) The Clerk of Court must provide Petitioner with a copy of the form 7 recommended by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for filing an Application for Leave 8 to File Second or Successive Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 or Motion Under 28 9 U.S.C. § 2255. 10 (3) Pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, in the 11 event Petitioner files an appeal, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability 12 because reasonable jurists would not find the Court’s procedural ruling debatable. See 13 Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). 14 Dated this 2nd day of December, 2015. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -3- Form 12. (New, 7/1/02) Application for Leave to File Second or Successive Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 or Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 UNITED STATES COURT of APPEALS for the NINTH CIRCUIT 95 Seventh Street San Francisco, California 94103 Application for Leave to File Second or Successive Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 or Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Docket Number ________________________________________________________________ (to be provided by court) Petitioner's name _______________________________________________________________ Prisoner registration number Address ______________________________________________________________________ Instructions - Read Carefully (1) This application, whether handwritten or typewritten, must be legible and signed by the petitioner under penalty of perjury. An original and five (5) copies must be provided to the Clerk of the Ninth Circuit. The application must comply with 9th Circuit Rule 22-3, which is attached to this form. (2) All questions must be answered concisely. Add separate sheets if necessary. (3) The petitioner shall serve a copy of this application and any attachments on respondent and must complete and file a proof of service with this application. (4) The petitioner shall attach to this application copies of the magistrate judge's report and recommendation and the district court's opinion in any prior federal habeas proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 or § 2255 or state why such documents are unavailable to petitioner. You Must Answer the Following Questions: (1) What conviction(s) are you challenging? ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ (2) In what court(s) were you convicted of these crime(s)? ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ (3) What was the date of each of your conviction(s) and what is the length of each sentence? ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ For questions (4) through (9), provide information separately for each of your previous §§ 2254 or 2255 proceedings. Use additional pages if necessary. (4) With respect to each conviction and sentence, have you ever filed a petition or motion for habeas corpus relief in federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 or § 2255? Yes G No G (a) In which federal district court did you file a petition or motion? ________________________________________________________________________ (b) What was the docket number? ______________________________________________ (c) On what date did you file the petition/motion? ___________________________________ (5) What grounds were raised in your previous habeas proceeding? (list all grounds and issues previously raised in that petition/ motion) ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ (6) Did the district court hold an evidentiary hearing? Yes G No G (7) How did the district court rule on your petition/motion? G G G District court dismissed petition/motion? If yes, on what grounds? __________________________________________________________________ District court denied petition/motion; District court granted relief; if yes, on what claims and what was the relief? __________________________________________________________________ (Attach copies of all reports and orders issued by the district court.) (8) (9) On what date did the district court decide your petition/motion? ________________________________________________________________________ Did you file an appeal from that disposition? Yes G No G (a) What was the docket number of your appeal? __________________________________ (b) How did the court of appeals decide your appeal?_______________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ (10) State concisely each and every ground or issue you wish to raise in your current petition or motion for habeas relief. Summarize briefly the facts supporting each ground or issue. ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ (11) For each ground raised, was it raised in the state courts? If so, what did the state courts rule and when? ________________________________________________________________________ (12) For each ground/issue raised, was this claim raised in any prior federal petition/motion? (list each ground separately) ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ (13) For each ground/issue raised, does this claim rely on a new rule of constitutional law? (list each ground separately and give case name and citation for each new rule of law) ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ (14) For each ground/issue raised, does this claim rely on newly discovered evidence? What is the evidence and when did you discover it? Why has this newly discovered evidence not been previously available to you? (list each ground separately) ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ (15) For each ground/issue raised, does the newly discovered evidence establish your innocence? How? ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ (16) For each ground/issue raised, does the newly discovered evidence establish a federal constitutional error? Which provision of the Constitution was violated and how? ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ (17) Provide any other basis for your application not previously stated. ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Date: __________________ Signature:_________________________________ Proof of Service on Respondent MUST be Attached.

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?