Haden v. Martel et al

Filing 3

ORDER OF DISMISSAL. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 2/16/2012. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service). (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/16/2012)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

STEVEN HADEN,

9

Petitioner,
v.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

No. C-11-4799 EMC (pr)

MICHAEL MARTEL, Warden; et al.,

12

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Respondent.
___________________________________/

13
14

Steven Haden, a prisoner incarcerated at San Quentin State Prison, filed a pro se petition for

15

writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 to challenge the sentence imposed for his 1998

16

spousal abuse conviction from the San Mateo County Superior Court. The petition is not his first

17

federal habeas petition concerning his 1998 conviction. His earlier habeas petition in Haden v.

18

Hubbard, No. C 01-20404 JF, was denied in 2004. The Ninth Circuit denied a certificate of

19

appealability when Haden attempted to appeal the denial of that petition.

20

A second or successive petition may not be filed in this Court unless the petitioner first

21

obtains from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit an order authorizing this Court

22

to consider the petition. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A).

23

Haden has not obtained an order from the Ninth Circuit permitting the filing of a second or

24

successive petition. This Court will not entertain a new petition from Haden until he first obtains

25

permission from the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to file such a petition. This action is

26

DISMISSED without prejudice to Haden filing a petition in this court after he obtains the necessary

27

order from the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

28

1

If Haden wants to attempt to obtain the necessary order from the Ninth Circuit, he should

2

very clearly mark the first page of his document as a "MOTION FOR ORDER AUTHORIZING

3

DISTRICT COURT TO CONSIDER SECOND OR SUCCESSIVE PETITION PURSUANT TO 28

4

U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)" rather than labeling it as a habeas petition because the Ninth Circuit clerk's

5

office is apt to simply forward to this court any document labeled as a habeas petition. He also

6

should mail the motion to the Ninth Circuit (at 95 Seventh Street, San Francisco, CA 94103), rather

7

than to this Court. In his motion to the Ninth Circuit, he should explain how he meets the

8

requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b).

9

The Clerk shall close the file.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

Petitioner's in forma pauperis application is GRANTED. (Docket # 2).

12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13
14

Dated: February 16, 2012

15
_________________________
EDWARD M. CHEN
United States District Judge

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

2