Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-00742/USCOURTS-casd-3_19-cv-00742-1/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

19cv0742 MMA (MDD)

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

JUAN M. CASTRO. C.,

Petitioner,

v.

UNKNOWN,

Respondent.

Case No.: 19cv0742 MMA (MDD)

SUMMARY DISMISSAL OF 

SUCCESSIVE PETITION 

PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C.

§ 2244(b)(3)(A) GATEKEEPER 

PROVISION

Petitioner, Juan M. Castro C., a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a 

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He has not paid the 

$5.00 filing fee and has not filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court does 

not rule on Petitioner’s in forma pauperis status because this case is summarily dismissed 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A) as indicated below. 

PRIOR PETITIONS FILED BY PETITIONER

The instant Petition is not the first Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Petitioner 

has submitted to this Court challenging his December 10, 1999 conviction and March 24, 

2000 sentence in San Diego Superior Court case No. SCD097339. On July 1, 2004, 

Petitioner filed in this Court a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus in case no. 04cv1325 

WQH (POR). In that petition, Petitioner challenged his conviction and sentence in San 

Diego Superior Court case No. SCD097339 as well. On August 3, 2005, this Court 

denied the petition as untimely. (See Order filed August 3, 2005 in case No. 04cv1325

WQH (POR) [ECF No. 15].) Petitioner thereafter filed another habeas corpus petition 

Case 3:19-cv-00742-MMA-MDD Document 10 Filed 07/15/19 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 2
2

19cv0742 MMA (MDD)

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

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 in this Court in case no. 09cv0163 H (WMc) challenging 

his conviction and sentence in San Diego Superior Court case No. SCD097339. On 

February 2, 2009, this Court dismissed the petition as successive. (See Order filed 

February 2, 2009 in case No. 09cv0163 H (WMc) [ECF No. 13].)

INSTANT PETITION BARRED BY GATEKEEPER PROVISION

Petitioner is now seeking to challenge the same conviction he challenged in his 

prior federal habeas petitions. 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); McNabb v. Yates, 576 F.3d 1028, 1030 (9th Cir. 2009) (holding that dismissal 

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

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

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 

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 Ninth 

Circuit Application for Leave to File Second or Successive Petition together with a 

copy of this Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

CC: ALL PARTIES

Dated: July 15, 2019

Case 3:19-cv-00742-MMA-MDD Document 10 Filed 07/15/19 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 2