Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02757/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02757-1/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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LANCE K. HENDERSON,

Petitioner,

v.

DAVE DAVEY,

Respondent.

No. 2: 14-cv-2757 KJN P

ORDER

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas 

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner consented to the jurisdiction of the undersigned. 

(ECF No. 3.)

On December 29, 2014, the undersigned ordered petitioner to either pay the filing fee or 

file an application to proceed in forma pauperis within thirty days. (ECF No. 5.) On February 3, 

2015, petitioner filed a copy of his trust account statement. (ECF No. 7.) The undersigned 

construes petitioner’s trust account statement to contain an application to proceed in forma 

pauperis. 

Examination of the in forma pauperis application reveals that petitioner is unable to afford 

the costs of suit. Accordingly, the application to proceed in forma pauperis will be granted. See

28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).

////

Case 2:14-cv-02757-KJN Document 10 Filed 03/09/15 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

In this action, petitioner challenges his 2004 conviction from the Sacramento County 

Superior Court. Court records indicate that petitioner has previously brought a habeas petition in 

this court challenging the same conviction, CIV No. 06-cv-2369 JAM CMK P.1 On October 15, 

2008, the court denied 06-2369, and the Ninth Circuit denied petitioner’s appeal on March 8, 

2010. Thus, in the instant case, petitioner is attempting to bring a second or successive petition. 

Before a second or successive petition is filed in the district court, the applicant is required 

to move in the appropriate court of appeals for an order authorizing the district court to consider 

the application. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). Here, petitioner has not obtained an order from the 

Ninth Circuit authorizing the district court to consider this second or successive petition. 

Petitioner cannot proceed with this action unless and until he obtains such an order from the 

Ninth Circuit. Accordingly, this action is dismissed without prejudice to its refiling with a copy 

of an order from the Ninth Circuit authorizing petitioner to file a second or successive petition.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis is granted;

2. This action is dismissed without prejudice.

Dated: March 9, 2015

Hen2757.56

 

1

 A court may take judicial notice of court records. See MGIC Indem. Co. v.Weisman, 803 F.2d 

500, 505 (9th Cir. 1986); United States v. Wilson, 631 F.2d 118, 119 (9th Cir. 1980). 

Case 2:14-cv-02757-KJN Document 10 Filed 03/09/15 Page 2 of 2