Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00870/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00870-2/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JASON DAVID YONAI,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-06-0870 MCE DAD P

vs.

SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY COURT

OFFICIALS, et al.,

Respondents. ORDER

 /

The court has received from the pro se petitioner a letter requesting that the

undersigned magistrate judge rehear his habeas petition on its merits.

The petition filed in this case challenges a judgment of conviction that was

entered in the San Joaquin County Superior Court on July 3, 2002, pursuant to petitioner’s plea

of nolo contendere to a charge of assault with a deadly weapon. In findings and

recommendations filed on April 27, 2006, the undersigned recommended that the habeas petition

be dismissed for failure to exhaust state court remedies on the claims alleged in the petition. In

objections filed on May 8, 2006, petitioner asserted that he is falsely incarcerated, referred to

numerous pending cases in various state courts, and proclaimed his innocence of an unspecified

conviction or convictions. Petitioner’s objections contained no assertion of exhaustion of state

court remedies. Upon the filing of petitioner’s objections, the findings and recommendations

Case 2:06-cv-00870-MCE -DAD Document 12 Filed 06/09/06 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

2

were submitted to the district judge, and on June 1, 2006, the district judge adopted the findings

and recommendations in full. Judgment was entered accordingly, and the case was closed.

In his letter dated May 29, 2006, and filed June 2, 2006, petitioner asserts for the

first time that he received “denials for [his] habeas corpuses,” including one in “case number

S143434, or S143487, in the California Supreme Court.” Petitioner is informed that the

undersigned cannot rehear petitioner’s habeas petition because the findings and

recommendations issued on April 27, 2006, have been adopted and this case has been closed.

If petitioner wishes to appeal from the final judgment entered on June 1, 2006, he

must do so within the time specified by Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. If

petitioner wishes to seek reconsideration by the district judge, he must seek such reconsideration

promptly by proper motion filed pursuant to an applicable federal rule. Petitioner is cautioned

that any such motion should be accompanied by evidence of exhaustion, including a complete

copy of each and every petition he filed in the California Supreme Court concerning his 2002 San

Joaquin County conviction, together with copies of all orders issued by the California Supreme

Court with regard to such petitions.

In accordance with the above, IT IS ORDERED that petitioner’s June 2, 2006

request for rehearing by the undersigned is denied.

DATED: June 8, 2006.

DAD:13

yona0870.158

Case 2:06-cv-00870-MCE -DAD Document 12 Filed 06/09/06 Page 2 of 2