Alexander

Alexander v. Davis

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaOctober 9, 20193:19-cv-02596California401 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6 7 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 RICKEY ALEXANDER, No. C 19-2596 WHA (PR) 10 Petitioner, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

DISMISS

11 v. (Dkt. No. 10) 12 RONALD DAVIS, Warden, 13 Respondent. / 14 15 Petitioner, a state prisoner, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 16 U.S.C. § 2254. Respondent has filed a motion to dismiss the petition because it is a second or 17 successive petition. Because this issue can be readily decided based upon the petition, the 18 motion, the court dockets, and other court records, there is no need for an opposition or a reply 19 brief. 20 A second or successive petition may not be filed in this court unless petitioner first 21 obtains from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit an order authorizing this 22 court to consider the petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). This requirement is 23 jurisdictional. Burton v. Stewart, 549 U.S. 147, 156 (2007) (per curiam). In 1999, petitioner 24 filed a habeas petition in federal court challenging a 1992 state…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.