Bradford v. McKinney

Filing 2

ORDER re 1 Pro Se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Calvin L Bradford. The petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus shall be dismissed. Signed by Chief Judge Linda R Reade on 8/18/2015 (copy w/NEF mailed to Plt). (skm)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA
CENTRAL DIVISION

CALVIN L. BRADFORD,
Petitioner,

No. C15-3115-LRR

vs.
JIM MCKINNEY,

ORDER

Respondent.

This matter is before the court on the petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas
corpus (docket no. 1). The petitioner filed such application on May 15, 2015. The
petitioner paid the required filing fee. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914.
The petitioner previously sought relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. See Bradford v.
Burt, Case # 6:07-cv-02007-LRR (N.D. Iowa 2010). In Bradford v. Burt, Case # 6:07-cv02007-LRR (N.D. Iowa 2010), the court addressed the petitioner’s claims on the merits
and ultimately denied his application for a writ of habeas corpus. Once again, the
petitioner is attempting to challenge the same conviction and sentence. He, however, is
unable to do so before getting permission to file a second or successive application for a

writ of habeas corpus. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A).1 Accordingly, the petitioner’s
application for a writ of habeas corpus shall be dismissed.2
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:
The petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus is dismissed.
DATED this 18th day of August, 2015.

1

28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A) provides:
Before a second or successive application permitted by this section is
filed in the district court, the applicant shall move in the appropriate
court of appeals for an order authorizing the district court to consider
the application.

2

The petitioner references Bradford v. State, PCCV318079 (Webster Cnty. Dist.
Ct. 2015), which may be may be accessed at the following address:
http://www.iowacourts.gov/Online_Court_Services/. See Stutzka v. McCarville, 420 F.3d
757, 760 n.2 (8th Cir. 2005) (addressing court’s ability to take judicial notice of public
records). But, it is clear from such record that the Iowa District Court for Webster County
dismissed the petitioner’s application for post-conviction relief on July 20, 2015 and, to
date, the petitioner has not sought appellate relief. Consequently, it is clear that the
petitioner has not complied with 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1)(A), which requires the exhaustion
of remedies that are available in the courts of Iowa.
2