Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-03972/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-03972-0/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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID DEMOND HARRIS,

Petitioner,

v.

JEFF MACOMBER, Warden,

Respondent.

Case No. 15-cv-03972-KAW (PR)

ORDER DISMISSING SUCCESSIVE 

PETITION; DENYING CERTIFICATE 

OF APPEALABILITY

(Dkt. No. 8)

Petitioner David D. Harris filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his conviction in Alameda County Superior Court in 1999. 

Petitioner has consented to the jurisdiction of the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge over 

this action. Petitioner’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. Dkt. No. 8.

This is not Harris’ first challenge to his 1999 conviction. He also challenged it in an action 

filed in 2007. See Harris v. Yates, No. C 07-808 MHP (dismissed on January 3, 2008 as 

untimely). Harris did not appeal from the order of dismissal. However in 2009, he filed another 

federal habeas petition challenging the same 1999 conviction. See Harris v. People of the State of 

California, No. C 09-2362 MHP (dismissed on July 2, 2009 as a successive petition). Harris did 

not appeal from the order of dismissal.

A second or successive petition may not be filed in this court unless the petitioner first 

obtains from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit an order authorizing this 

court to consider the petition. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). 

Harris has not obtained the necessary order from the Ninth Circuit permitting him to file a 

second or successive petition. This Court will not entertain a new petition from Harris until he 

first obtains permission from the Ninth Circuit to file such a petition. This action is DISMISSED 

without prejudice to Harris filing a petition in this Court after he obtains the necessary order from 

Case 4:15-cv-03972-KAW Document 9 Filed 10/30/15 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

the Ninth Circuit. 

Further, the Court does not issue a certificate of appealability because jurists of reason 

would not find debatable whether the procedural ruling was correct. See Slack v. McDaniel, 

529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Petitioner is advised that he may not appeal the denial of a certificate 

of appealability in this Court; rather, he may seek a certificate from the court of appeals.

The clerk shall terminate all pending motions and close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

______________________________________

KANDIS A. WESTMORE

United States Magistrate Judge

10/30/15

Case 4:15-cv-03972-KAW Document 9 Filed 10/30/15 Page 2 of 2