Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-00344/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-00344-0/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- 11cv0344

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALEXANDER VALENTINE, Civil No. 11-0344 JAH (JMA)

Petitioner,

SUMMARY DISMISSAL OF

SUCCESSIVE PETITION PURSUANT

TO 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A)

GATEKEEPER PROVISION

vs.

KELLY HARRINGTON, et al.,

Respondents.

Petitioner, Alexander Valentine, a state prisoner proceeding with counsel, has filed a

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and has paid the $5.00 filing

fee. This case is summarily dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A) as indicated below.

PETITION BARRED BY GATEKEEPER PROVISION

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

submitted to this Court challenging his March 17, 1998 conviction in San Diego Superior Court

case No. SCD 122660. On April 18, 2001, Petitioner filed in this Court a Petition for Writ of

Habeas Corpus in case No. 01cv0681. In that petition, Petitioner challenged his conviction in

San Diego Superior Court case No. SCD 122660 as well. On January 7, 2004, this Court

conditionally granting the petition on the merits. (See Order filed Jan. 7, 2004 in case No.

01cv0681 J (RBB) [Doc. No. 27].) Both Petitioner and Respondent appealed that determination.

On November 7, 2005, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed in part and affirmed in part

Case 3:11-cv-00344-JAH-JMA Document 2 Filed 03/04/11 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- 11cv0344

this Court’s decision. (See Order in Valentine v. Giurbino, Nos. 04-55208 and 0455365 (9th

Cir. Nov. 7, 2005).) 

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

federal habeas petition. 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 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 Second or

Successive Petition or Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: March 3, 2011 _________________________________________

John A. Houston

United States District Judge

Case 3:11-cv-00344-JAH-JMA Document 2 Filed 03/04/11 Page 2 of 2