Norman Humphreys v. Scott Kernan

Filing 4

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DISMISSING PETITION by Judge Manuel L. Real, re Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2254) 1 . Because petitioner has not obtained leave from the Court of Appeals, this successive petition is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. (jsan)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

EASTERN DIVISION

10
11 NORMAN HUMPHREYS,
12
13
14
15

) Case No. EDCV 17-653-R(AJW)
)
Petitioner,
) MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
) DISMISSING PETITION
v.
)
)
SCOTT KERNAN,
)
)
Respondent.
)
_________________________________)

16
17

In 1996, petitioner was convicted in the Riverside County Superior

18 Court of one count of second degree murder and one count of child
19 endangerment. He was sentenced to state prison for a term of fifteen
20 years to life. [Petition at 2].
21

On April 22, 1999, petitioner filed a petition for a writ of

22 habeas corpus in this Court challenging his 1996 conviction. Case No.
23 CV 99-4334-LGB(AJW). On August 28, 2000, judgment was entered denying
24 the petition on the merits.
25

Petitioner filed the current petition for a writ of habeas corpus

26 on April 6, 2017. The petition challenges the sentence imposed based
27 upon petitioner’s 1996 conviction.
28

1

“Before a second or successive application permitted by this

2 section is filed in the district court, the applicant shall move in the
3 appropriate court of appeals for an order authorizing the district
4 court to consider the application.” 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). Absent
5 authorization from the Court of Appeals, this Court lacks jurisdiction
6 over a successive petition. See Magwood v. Patterson, 561 U.S. 320,
7 330-331 (2010); Cooper v. Calderon, 274 F.3d 1270, 1274 (9th Cir.
8 2001), cert. denied, 538 U.S. 984 (2003).
9

To the extent that petitioner might contend that his petition

10 meets an exception to the bar on successive petitions, he must present
11 any such argument to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Because
12 petitioner has not obtained leave from the Court of Appeals, this
13 successive petition is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.1
14

It is so ordered.

15
Dated: April 18, 2017
16
Manuel L. Real
United States District Judge

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

Ninth Circuit Rule No. 22-3(a) provides that “[i]f a second or
successive petition or motion, or an application for authorization to
file such a petition or motion, is mistakenly submitted to the district
court, the district court shall refer it to the court of appeals.”
Because the circumstances indicate that petitioner intentionally filed
this action in this Court, not that he did so mistakenly, Rule 22-3(a)
is inapplicable. Nevertheless, the Clerk is directed to mail petitioner
a copy of Ninth Circuit Form 12 so that petitioner may file an
application for leave to file a second or successive petition in the
Court of Appeals.