Watson v. Price

Filing 7

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 1/26/15 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr.; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Dillon, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

NYLES LAWAYNE WATSON,

12

No. 2:14-cv-2929 MCE GGH P

Petitioner,

13

v.

14

J. PRICE,

15

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Respondent.

16
17
18
19

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas
corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
The court’s records reveal that petitioner has previously filed an application for a writ of

20

habeas corpus attacking the conviction and sentence challenged in this case. The previous

21

application was filed on May 29, 2003, and was denied on the merits on August 21, 2008. See

22

Watson v. Carey, No. 3:03-cv-1150 LKK EFB. The current petition represents a successive

23

challenge to the same 1996 conviction at issue in petitioner’s prior petition. Before petitioner can

24

proceed with the instant application, he must move in the United States Court of Appeals for the

25

Ninth Circuit for an order authorizing the district court to consider the application. 28 U.S.C. §

26

2244(b)(3). Therefore, petitioner’s application must be dismissed without prejudice to its refiling

27

upon obtaining authorization from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

28

IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice.
1

1

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

2

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days

3

after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written

4

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

5

Findings and Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the

6

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951

7

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

8

Dated: January 26, 2015

9

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

10

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

11
12

GGH:076/Wats2929.succ

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2