Kirkpatrick v. Samuel

Filing 9

ORDER OF DISMISSAL. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on 03/05/2025. (dms, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/5/2025)Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

WILLIAM KIRKPATRICK,
Petitioner,

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Case No. 24-cv-08609-JST
ORDER OF DISMISSAL

v.
D. SAMUEL,
Respondent.

12
13
14
15

Petitioner has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. ECF No. 1. For the reasons set
forth below, this action is DISMISSED with prejudice.
DISCUSSION

16

On December 2, 2024, Petitioner filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in this Court,

17

stating that he wished to appeal the California Supreme Court’s September 18, 2024 Order in Cal.

18

Sup. Ct. C No. S004642, People v. Kirkpatrick. ECF No. 1. That same day, the Court sent

19

Petitioner a notice, informing him that this action was deficient because he had neither paid the

20

$5.00 filing fee nor filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF No. 2. The Court

21

informed Petitioner that, by December 31, 2024, he must either pay the filing fee or by file a

22

complete in forma pauperis application; or this action would be dismissed. Id. The deadline to

23

correct the deficiency has passed, and Petitioner has neither paid the filing fee nor filed an

24

application to proceed in forma pauperis. Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED for failure to

25

either pay the filing fee or file an in forma pauperis application.

26
27
28

The Court makes the following additional observations to guide the Petitioner in the event
he intends to bring these claims in a future filing.
To the extent that Petitioner is seeking to challenge the California Supreme Court’s

United States District Court
Northern District of California

1

September 18, 2024, this court is without subject matter jurisdiction to review the state court’s

2

decision and Petitioner must seek review by filing a petition for a writ of certiorari in the United

3

States Supreme Court. See District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 486-

4

87 (1983) (“[Federal district courts” do not have jurisdiction . . . over challenges to state court

5

decisions in particular cases arising out of judicial proceedings even if those challenges allege that

6

the state court’s action was unconstitutional. Review of those decisions may be had only in [the

7

United States Supreme Court.”); Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413, 416 (1923);

8

Mothershed v. Justices, 410 F.3d 602, 606 (9th Cir. 2005) (“Under Rooker–Feldman, lower

9

federal courts are without subject matter jurisdiction to review state court decisions, and state

10

court litigants may therefore only obtain federal review by filing a petition for a writ of certiorari

11

in the Supreme Court of the United States.”).

12

To the extent that Petitioner is seeking to file a federal action challenging his state court

13

criminal conviction, he must file the petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the district where his

14

conviction was obtained, as California federal courts traditionally have chosen to hear habeas

15

petitions challenging a state conviction or sentence in the district of conviction or sentencing. See

16

Habeas L.R. 2254-3(b)(1); Dannenberg v. Ingle, 831 F. Supp. 767, 768 (N.D. Cal. 1993); Laue v.

17

Nelson, 279 F. Supp. 265, 266 (N.D. Cal. 1968). Petitioner’s district of conviction is the Central

18

District of California. See Kirkpartick v. Chappell, 950 F.3d 1118, 1122 (9th Cir. 2020) (crime

19

committed in Burbank, California). Accordingly, any challenges to his conviction should be filed

20

in the Central District of California.

21

CONCLUSION

22

For the reasons set forth above, the Court DISMISSES this action without prejudice.

23

IT IS SO ORDERED.

24
25
26

Dated: March 5, 2025
______________________________________
JON S. TIGAR
United States District Judge

27
28
2