(HC)Ramirez v. The People of the State of California

Filing 5

ORDER Construing Petition as Motion to Amend Petition in Case No. 1:22-cv-295 HBK; ORDER Directing Clerk of Court to Re-File Instant Petition as Motion to Amend in Case No. 1:22-cv-295 HBK; ORDER Directing Clerk of Court to Close this Case signed by Magistrate Judge Helena M. Barch-Kuchta on 07/20/2022.(Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ISAIAH B. RAMIREZ,

12
13
14
15
16

Petitioner,
v.
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA,
Respondent.

Case No. 1:22-cv-00604-HBK (HC)
ORDER CONSTRUING PETITION AS
MOTION TO AMEND PETITION IN CASE
NO. 1:22-cv-00295-HBK
ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO
RE-FILE INSTANT PETITION AS MOTION
TO AMEND IN CASE NO. 1:22-cv-00295HBK
ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO
CLOSE THIS CASE

17
18
19

Petitioner Isaiah B. Ramirez, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this instant petition

20

for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on May 10, 2022. (Doc. No. 1). The Court

21

takes judicial notice of its own files which reveal that Petitioner has a previously filed federal

22

petition in this Court challenging the same conviction at case number 1:22-cv-00295-HBK. Thus,

23

the Court construes the filing as a motion to amend the petition filed in Petitioner’s earlier case

24

and orders this matter closed.

25

In Woods v. Carey, the Ninth Circuit held that, under certain circumstances, if a pro se

26

petitioner files a habeas petition during the pendency of a previous petition, the district court

27

should construe the second petition as a motion to amend the previous petition. 525 F.3d 886,

28

889-90 (9th Cir. 2008). Hence, Woods appears to require a district court to construe a “second or

1

successive” petition filed while an earlier petition is still pending in the district court as a motion

2

to amend the earlier petition.

3

Because Petitioner has a pending federal habeas petition in case number 1:22-cv-00295-

4

HBK, which challenges the same conviction as in this case, the Court must construe this Petition

5

as a motion to amend the earlier-filed petition. See id. at 889-90.

6

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

7

1. The Court construes the Petition (Doc. No. 1) as a motion to amend the Petition in

8

case number 1:22-cv-00295-HBK.

9

2. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to docket the Petition in this case as a motion to

10

amend in case number 1:22-cv-00295-HBK.

11

3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.

12
13
14

Dated:

July 20, 2022
HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2