Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-00417/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-00417-0/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN EARL JONES,

Petitioner,

v.

T. HOLT, Warden,

Respondent.

No. 2:15-cv-0417 CKD P

ORDER AND 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Petitioner is a California prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas 

corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He challenges a 2007 El Dorado County conviction for 

continuous sexual abuse of a child under the age of 14.

A review of the docket for case number 2:11-cv-1659 MCE EFB P reveals that petitioner 

challenged the conviction at issue in this action in that action as well. On September 21, 2012, 

the habeas petition in 2:11-cv-1659 MCE EFB P was dismissed as time-barred. Before petitioner 

can proceed with the instant successive petition, he must obtain authorization from the Ninth 

Circuit Court of Appeals. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3); see Murray v. Greiner, 394 F.3d 78, 81 (2d 

Cir. 2005) (dismissal of habeas petition as time-barred “constitutes an adjudication on the merits 

that renders future petitions under § 2254 challenging the same conviction ‘second or successive’ 

petitions under [28 U.S.C.§ 2244(b)]”). It does not appear petitioner has obtained the required

/////

Case 2:15-cv-00417-WBS-CKD Document 3 Filed 03/09/15 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

27

28

2

authorization. Therefore, petitioner's habeas petition must be dismissed without prejudice to its 

re-filing upon petitioner obtaining the required authorization. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk shall assign a district judge to 

this case.

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that:

1. Petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus be dismissed without prejudice; and

2. This case be closed.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 

after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written 

objections with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate 

Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” In his objections petitioner may address whether a 

certificate of appealability should issue in the event he files an appeal of the judgment in this 

case. See Rule 11, Federal Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases (the district court must issue or 

deny a certificate of appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the applicant). 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: March 9, 2015

1/mp

jone1659.suctb

_____________________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:15-cv-00417-WBS-CKD Document 3 Filed 03/09/15 Page 2 of 2