(HC) Iseli v. Lynch

Filing 30

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Sean C. Riordan on 3/10/2025 RECOMMENDING this action be summarily dismissed without prejudice as an unauthorized second or successive § 2254 application. Referred to Judge William B. Shubb. Objections to F&R due within 21 days. (Deputy Clerk KLY)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

BRANDEN WILLIE ISELI,

12

Petitioner,

13

v.

14

JEFF LYNCH,

15

No. 2:24-cv-0837-WBS-SCR

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Respondent.

16
17

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a first amended petition for a writ

18

of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his San Joaquin County conviction for

19

murder and attempted murder. Petitioner seeks “to reduce his pending release date” based on

20

various claims. ECF No. 28 at 4.

21

Under Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, the court must review all

22

petitions for writ of habeas corpus and summarily dismiss any petition if it is plain that the

23

petitioner is not entitled to relief. The court has conducted that review.

24

Court records reveal that petitioner has previously filed a petition for a writ of habeas

25

corpus attacking the same conviction and sentence challenged in this case. See Iseli v. People of

26

the State of California, Case No. 2:22-cv-01483-TLN-EFB (E.D. Cal.) (“Iseli I”). Petitioner was

27

denied relief on the merits of the claims raised in his first habeas corpus application on March 13,

28

2023. See Iseli I at ECF No. 31. Before petitioner can proceed with the instant successive
1

1

petition, he must first obtain authorization from United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth

2

Circuit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3). Because it does not appear that petitioner has

3

obtained the required authorization, petitioner’s first amended habeas petition must be dismissed

4

without prejudice.

5
6
7

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be summarily dismissed
without prejudice as an unauthorized second or successive § 2254 application.
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

8

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

9

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

10

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

11

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

12

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

13

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

14

DATED: March 10, 2025

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