Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_08-cv-02422/USCOURTS-casd-3_08-cv-02422-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\L\08cv2422 dismiss.wpd, 199 -1-

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTHONY ALVAREZ, Civil No. 08-2422 L (CAB)

Petitioner,

ORDER DISMISSING CASE 

v. WITHOUT PREJUDICE

MICHAEL SMELESKY, Warden

Respondent.

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas

Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.

FAILURE TO SATISFY FILING FEE REQUIREMENT

Petitioner has failed to pay the $5.00 filing fee and has failed to move to proceed in forma

pauperis. This Court cannot proceed until Petitioner has either paid the $5.00 filing fee or

qualified to proceed in forma pauperis. See Rule 3(a), 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254. 

FAILURE TO USE PROPER FORM

Additionally, a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus must be submitted in accordance with

the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. See

Rule 2(c), 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254. In order to comply with the Local Rules, the petition must be

submitted upon a court-approved form and in accordance with the instructions approved by the

Court. Presently, Petitioner has submitted an application for writ of habeas corpus on a nonapproved form. 

Case 3:08-cv-02422-L-CAB Document 8 Filed 01/09/09 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 1

A blank Ninth Circuit Application for Leave to File a Second or Successive Petition will be sent to

Petitioner along with a copy of this Order.

K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\L\08cv2422 dismiss.wpd, 199 -2-

GATEKEEPER PROVISION

Further, it appears that Petitioner is challenging the same conviction he challenged in a

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed in this Court in case number 06cv2112 WQH (JMA).

 In that petition, Petitioner challenged his conviction in San Diego Superior Court case No. SCD

174061. On August 10, 2007, this Court denied the petition on the merits. (See Order filed

August 10, 2007, in case No. 06cv2112 WQH (JMA) [Doc. No. 12].) Petitioner appealed that

determination. On August 1, 2008, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied the certificate of

appealability. (See Order in Alvarez v. Almager, No. 07-56714 (9th Cir. Aug. 1, 2008).) In the

current Petition, Petitioner states he is challenging a conviction in San Diego, but does not state

what case number he is challenging. (Pet. at 1.) If Petitioner is attempting to raise a second, or

successive, challenge to the same San Diego Superior Court conviction he must show that he

has obtained an Order from the appropriate court of appeals authorizing the district court to

consider a successive petition, or the petition may not be filed in the district court. See 28 U.S.C.

§ 2244(b)(3)(A).1

 

//

//

//

//

//

//

//

//

//

//

//

//

Case 3:08-cv-02422-L-CAB Document 8 Filed 01/09/09 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\L\08cv2422 dismiss.wpd, 199 -3-

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

For the foregoing reasons, the Court DISMISSES the Petition for Petitioner’s failure to

(1) satisfy the filing fee requirement, and (2) use a court-approved form. If Petitioner wishes to

proceed with this case, he must submit, no later than March 16, 2009,

(a) a First Amended Petition on a court-approved form stating that he is challenging

a different San Diego Superior Court conviction than he previously challenged in

case number 06cv2112 WQH (JMA), OR

(b) a First Amended Petition on a court-approved form along with an Order from the

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals stating that Petitioner may file a successive

petition with this Court, AND

(c) either the $5.00 fee or adequate proof of his inability to pay the fee, along with a

copy of this Order.

 The Clerk of Court is directed to send a blank Southern District of California First

Amended Petition and In Forma Pauperis Application to Petitioner along with a copy of

this Order. The Clerk of Court is further directed to send Petitioner a blank Ninth Circuit

Application for Leave to File Second or Successive Petition .

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: January 9, 2009

M. James Lorenz

United States District Court Judge

Case 3:08-cv-02422-L-CAB Document 8 Filed 01/09/09 Page 3 of 3