Rose
Rose v. State of California
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JAMES E. ROSE, JR, Case No.: 3:21-cv-0267-CAB-BGS aka “Jason E. Roman, III”,
ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE
Petitioner, OF APPEALABILITY v.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
15 Respondent. 16 17 On February 8, 2021, Petitioner, proceeding pro se, submitted a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with a request to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF Nos. 1 & 2. On March 1, 2021, the Court granted Petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis but dismissed the Petition without prejudice because Plaintiff failed to state a cognizable federal claim and failed to allege he was in custody at the time of filing, as required under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. See ECF No. 3 at 3–5, citing Brock v. Weston, 31 F.3d 887, 889 (9th Cir. 1994) (“Subject matter jurisdiction under the federal habeas corpus statute, 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a), is limited to those persons ‘in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State.’”) The Court notified Petitioner that in order…