(HC) Bolin v. Newcomb et al

Filing 6

ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 3/7/2025 ORDERING that the Clerk of Court randomly assign a district judge to this action, and RECOMMENDING that the case be dismissed without leave to amend as outside this court's jurisdiction. District Judge Daniel J. Calabretta and Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan assigned for all further proceedings. Referred to District Judge Daniel J. Calabretta. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. New Case Number: 2:24-cv-1534-DJC-EFB P. (Deputy Clerk HAH)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

PAUL C. BOLIN,

12
13

No. 2:24-cv-01534-EFB (HC)
Petitioner,

v.

14

RACHEL NEWCOMB, et al.,

15

Respondents.

ORDER AND FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS

16
17
18

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. He filed this action on May 31, 2024 with

19

the caption: “Petitioner’s request/demand for issue of show cause order pursuant to Penal Code §

20

1473.” ECF No. 1. Petitioner paid the $5 fee for the filing of a petition for writ of habeas corpus,

21

and the case was classified by the court clerk as a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254.

22

Petitioner has filed two motions to clarify that he seeks a show cause order under

23

California Penal Code § 1473 and not a writ of habeas corpus. ECF Nos. 4, 5. But petitioner

24

does not present a basis for this court to exercise jurisdiction over the case. Section 1473 is a

25

California statute concerning state habeas petitions. This state statute cannot and does not confer

26

jurisdiction on this federal court. See Quintero v. Pfeiffer, No. CV 21-3782-MWF(E), 2021 U.S.

27

Dist. LEXIS 249565, at *19 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 3, 2021) (state prisoner’s claim that he was entitled

28
1

1
2

to resentencing under § 1473 was not cognizable by federal court).
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court randomly assign a

3

district judge to this action. It is further RECOMMENDED that the case be dismissed without

4

leave to amend as outside this court’s jurisdiction.

5

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

6

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

7

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

8

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

9

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections

10

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v.

11

Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

12
13

Dated: March 7, 2025

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