Peterson v. Hatton

Filing 11

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 2/22/2018 RECOMMENDING that 10 Motion for Certificate of Appealability be denied as unnecessary. Referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Fabillaran, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

PHILLIP ANTHONY PETERSON,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:17-cv-0785 MCE DB P

Petitioner,
v.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

S. HATTON,
Respondent.

16
17

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. On January 30, 2018, the court dismissed

18

petitioner’s petition on the grounds that it is a successive petition. (ECF Nos. 7, 8.) Petitioner

19

was informed that he must seek permission to file a successive petition from the Court of Appeals

20

before he may proceed here.

21

On February 12, 2018, petitioner filed an “Application for Certificate of Appealability

22

from District Court.” (ECF No. 10.) Petitioner does not need a certificate of appealability to

23

apply to the Court of Appeals for permission to file a successive petition in the district court. See

24

9th Cir. R. 22-3(a); Rule 11, Rules Governing § 2254 Cases. Petitioner is advised to review Rule

25

22-3 of the Rules for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for the requirements for applying for

26

permission to file a successive petition.

27
28

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that petitioner’s February 12, 2018
Application for Certificate of Appealability be denied as unnecessary.
1

1

These findings and recommendations will be 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 result in waiver of the right to appeal the district court’s order. Martinez v.

7

Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

8

Dated: February 22, 2018

9
10
11
12
13
14

DLB:9
DLB1/prisoner-habeas/pete0785.fr(2)

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