Lavoll v. Howell et al

Filing 2

USCA ORDER. The Clerk will transfer the proposed section 2254 petition filed at Docket Entry No. 1, to the United States District Court for the District of Nevada. The proposed petition is deemed filed in the district court on November 26, 2019, the date on which it was delivered to prison authorities for forwarding to this court. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRS)

Download PDF
Case: 19-73183, 01/09/2020, ID: 11557255, DktEntry: 2, Page 1 of 2 FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JAN 9 2020 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS TERRANCE L. LAVOLL, Applicant, No. 19-73183 District of Nevada, Las Vegas v. ORDER JERRY HOWELL, Warden, Respondent. Before: CALLAHAN, NGUYEN, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges. The application for authorization to file a second or successive 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition in the district court seeks authorization to challenge the applicant’s Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada jury-trial convictions in case number 97C144545. The application contends, and the docket for those proceedings confirms, that on July 6, 2012, the judgment was amended to include a term of lifetime supervision and requirement of sex-offender registration. Because this is the applicant’s first proposed petition challenging the amended judgment of conviction issued in 2012, the petition is not “second or successive,” and authorization to file a habeas petition in the district court is not required. See Magwood v. Patterson, 561 U.S. 320 (2010); Wentzell v. Neven, 674 F.3d 1124 (9th Cir. 2012). We express no opinion as to the merits of the applicant’s claims or whether Case: 19-73183, 01/09/2020, ID: 11557255, DktEntry: 2, Page 2 of 2 the procedural requirements of 28 U.S.C. §§ 2244(d) and 2254 are satisfied. The Clerk will transfer the proposed section 2254 petition filed at Docket Entry No. 1, to the United States District Court for the District of Nevada. The proposed petition is deemed filed in the district court on November 26, 2019, the date on which it was delivered to prison authorities for forwarding to this court. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 270 (1988); Orona v. United States, 826 F.3d 1196, 1198-99 (9th Cir. 2016) (AEDPA’s statute of limitations period is tolled during pendency of an application). Upon transfer of the proposed petition, the Clerk will close this original action. Any pending motions are denied as moot. No further filings will be entertained in this case. DENIED AS UNNECESSARY; PROPOSED PETITION TRANSFERRED to the district court. 2 19-73183

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?