Madden

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 KARLOS FRYE, Case No. 2:21-cv-01682-JDP (HC) Petitioner, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

THAT THE AMENDED PETITION BE

v. DISMISSED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND

AS TIME-BARRED

RAYMOND MADDEN, ECF No. 6 Respondent. 14 Petitioner, proceeding without counsel, seeks a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. After reviewing his initial petition, I found that it was time-barred and could not proceed. ECF No. 5. I gave petitioner an opportunity to amend and to explain why, despite untimeliness, his claims should be allowed to proceed. Id. Petitioner filed an amended petition which, for the reasons stated below, does not save his claims. The amended petition is before me for preliminary review under Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. Under Rule 4, the assigned judge must examine the habeas petition and order a response unless it “plainly appears” that the petitioner is not entitled to relief. See…