Willey v. Price

Filing 11

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. on 12/16/2015. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/16/2015)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

RONALD WAYNE WILLEY,
Petitioner,

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Case No. 15-cv-04268-HSG (PR)
ORDER OF DISMISSAL

v.
JEROME PRICE, Warden,
Respondent.

12
13

Petitioner, a state prisoner, filed this pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to

14

28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner filed a previous petition for writ of habeas corpus with this Court,

15

challenging the same conviction and sentence. See Case No. C 97-1617 CW (PR). The Court

16

denied the first petition on the merits on February 19, 1998.

17

The Court finds the present petition is a second or successive petition attacking the same

18

conviction and sentence as petitioner’s prior federal habeas petition. A successive petition may

19

not be filed in this court unless petitioner first obtains from the United States Court of Appeals for

20

the Ninth Circuit an order authorizing this Court to consider the petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)

21

(3)(A). Petitioner has not sought or obtained such an order from the United States Court of

22

Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Even if petitioner has new claims, he must still obtain the necessary

23

authorization under Section 2244(b) from the United States Court of Appeals before he may

24

proceed. The petition is accordingly DISMISSED without prejudice to refiling if petitioner

25

obtains the necessary order.

26

Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases now requires a district court to rule

27

on whether a petitioner is entitled to a certificate of appealability in the same order in which the

28

petition is decided. Petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing that a reasonable jurist

1

would find this Court’s denial of his claim on procedural grounds debatable or wrong. See Slack

2

v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Consequently, no certificate of appealability is warranted

3

in this case.

4

Petitioner's in forma pauperis application (docket no. 7) is GRANTED.

5

The Clerk shall enter judgment and close the file.

6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7

Dated: 12/16/2015

8
________________________
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.
United States District Judge

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2