Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-00019/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-00019-0/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

17cv0019-AJB (JLB)

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DERRYL TYRONE FOSTER,

Petitioner,

v.

KATHLEEN A. KENEALY, et al.,

Respondents.

Case No.: 17cv0019-AJB (JLB)

SUMMARY DISMISSAL OF 

SUCCESSIVE PETITION 

PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2244(b)(3)(A) GATEKEEPER 

PROVISION

On January 3, 2017, Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a Petition 

for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (ECF No. 1.) Petitioner 

challenged the restitution order entered following his August 31, 2006, conviction in San 

Diego County Superior Court Case No. SCD195407. (Id.) On January 6, 2017, the Court 

granted Petitioner leave to proceed in forma pauperis but dismissed the Petition without 

prejudice because Petitioner had not alleged that he was in custody in violation of the 

Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States as required to confer jurisdiction in this 

Court over his petition. (ECF No. 2 at 2, citing Bailey v. Hill, 599 F.3d 976, 982 (9th Cir. 

2010) (stating that 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a) “does not confer jurisdiction over a state prisoner’s 

in-custody challenge to a restitution order imposed as part of a criminal sentence.”).) 

Petitioner was granted leave to a First Amended Petition. (ECF No. 3.)

Case 3:17-cv-00019-AJB-JLB Document 4 Filed 03/09/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 3
2

17cv0019-AJB (JLB)

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

Petitioner has now filed a First Amended Petition in which he repeats his claim 

challenging his restitution order, but adds a claim alleging the trial judge was biased. (ECF 

No. 3 at 6.)

PETITION BARRED BY GATEKEEPER PROVISION

This is not the first Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Petitioner has submitted to 

this Court challenging his August 31, 2006 conviction in San Diego County Superior Court 

Case No. SCD195407. On September 28, 2011, Petitioner filed in this Court a Petition for 

a Writ of Habeas Corpus in which he challenged his August 31, 2006 conviction in San 

Diego County Superior Court Case No. SCD195407. (See Pet. filed 9/28/11 [ECF No. 1] 

in So.Dist.Ca. Civil Case No. 11cv2270-LAB (WMC).) On August 26, 2013, this Court 

denied the petition on the basis that it was not filed within the one-year statute of limitations 

applicable to § 2254 habeas petitions. (See Order filed 8/26/13 [ECF No. 38] in So.Dist.Ca. 

Civil Case No. 11cv2270-LAB (WMC).) The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied a 

Certificate of Appealability on November 20, 2013. (See ECF No. 42 in So.Dist.Ca. Civil 

Case No. 11cv2270-LAB (WMC).) 

Petitioner is now seeking to challenge the same conviction and sentence he 

challenged in his prior federal habeas petition. The prior dismissal of his previous petition 

for failure to comply with the one-year statute of limitations renders subsequent petitions 

challenging the same conviction or sentence “second or successive” under 2244(b). 

McNabb v. Yates, 576 F.3d 1028, 1030 (9th Cir. 2009). Unless a petitioner shows he or 

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

court to consider a successive petition, the petition may not be filed in the district court. 

See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). Here, there is no indication the Ninth Circuit Court of 

Appeals has granted Petitioner leave to file a successive petition.

CONCLUSION

Because there is no indication Petitioner has obtained permission from the Ninth 

Circuit Court of Appeals to file a successive petition, this Court cannot consider his 

Petition. Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES this action without prejudice to Petitioner 

Case 3:17-cv-00019-AJB-JLB Document 4 Filed 03/09/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 3
3

17cv0019-AJB (JLB)

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

filing a petition in this court if he obtains the necessary order from the Ninth Circuit Court 

of Appeals. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail Petitioner a blank Application for 

Leave to File a Second or Successive Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 or § 2255 together 

with a copy of this Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 9, 2017

Case 3:17-cv-00019-AJB-JLB Document 4 Filed 03/09/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 3