Marshall

MEMORANDUM **

In appeal no. 06-56055, California state prisoner Stanley T. Johnson appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as second or successive. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we affirm.

Upon review of the record, we conclude that the district court properly dismissed Johnson’s federal habeas petition as second or successive without authorization. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 2244 (b)(1) & (2); Babbitt v. Woodford, 177 F.3d 744, 745-47 (9th Cir.1999) (per curiam); cf. Hill v. Alaska, 297 F.3d 895, 898 (9th Cir.2002).

In ease no. 06-73687, Johnson has filed an application for authorization to file a second or successive 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition in district court. This application is denied. Johnson has not made a prima facie showing under 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (b)(2) that:

No petition for rehearing or motion for reconsideration shall be filed or entertained in this case. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (b)(3)(E).

Appeal no. 06-56055 is AFFIRMED.

Case no. 06-73687 is DENIED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.