Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00036/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00036-0/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

 A court may take judicial notice of court records. See MGIC Indem. Co. v. Weisman, 803 F.2d 1

500, 505 (9th Cir. 1986); United States v. Wilson, 631 F.2d 118, 119 (9th Cir. 1980).

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JASON DAVID YONAI,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-07-0036 DFL GGH P

vs.

MS. EVANS, et al., ORDER AND

Respondents. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of

habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with a request to proceed in forma pauperis.

Examination of the in forma pauperis affidavit reveals that petitioner is unable to

afford the costs of suit. Accordingly, the request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. 

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). 

Petitioner's petition was filed with the court on January 8, 2007. In this action,

petitioner challenges his 2002 conviction from San Joaquin County Superior Court in case no.

SF085043A. The court's own records reveal that petitioner is proceeding with another habeas

petition in this court challenging the same conviction, CIV S-06-2324 DFL DAD P. It appears that 1

Case 2:07-cv-00036-JAM-GGH Document 10 Filed 03/05/07 Page 1 of 2
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

 Petitioner should raise all of his claims challenging his conviction in case no. SF085043A in

2

one federal habeas petition. 

2

petitioner is raising the same claims in CIV S-06-2324 as he is raising in the instant action. Due to 2

the duplicative nature of the present action, the court finds it frivolous and, therefore, will dismiss

the petition. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s application to proceed in

forma pauperis is granted;

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. 

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the District Judge assigned to

this case pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty days after being served

with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written objections with the court. The

document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations.” 

Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to

appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: 3/5/07

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

yon36.dup

Case 2:07-cv-00036-JAM-GGH Document 10 Filed 03/05/07 Page 2 of 2