Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-02917/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-02917-1/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

Order Dismissing Petition as Second or Successive; Denying Certificate of Appealability

P:\PRO-SE\RMW\HC.15\Juniel917sos.wpd

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RICHARD JAMES JUNIEL, JR,

Petitioner,

 vs.

DIRECTOR, CALIFORNIA

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

Respondent. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 15-2917 RMW (PR)

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION

AS SECOND OR SUCCESSIVE;

DENYING CERTIFICATE OF

APPEALABILITY 

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

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner challenges his 2003 criminal conviction and judgment

for murder and related offenses, arising out of Alameda County. For the reasons stated below,

the instant petition is DISMISSED without prejudice as a second or successive petition pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b).

DISCUSSION

A district court must dismiss claims presented in a second or successive habeas petition

challenging the same conviction and sentence unless the claims presented in the previous

petition were denied for failure to exhaust. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(1); Babbitt v. Woodford,

177 F.3d 744, 745-46 (9th Cir. 1999). Additionally, a district court must dismiss any new claims

raised in a successive petition unless the petitioner received an order from the court of appeals

authorizing the district court to consider the petition. 

Case 5:15-cv-02917-RMW Document 11 Filed 09/22/15 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

Order Dismissing Petition as Second or Successive; Denying Certificate of Appealability

P:\PRO-SE\RMW\HC.15\Juniel917sos.wpd 2

Here, the instant petition is not petitioner’s first federal habeas petition concerning his

2003 conviction from the Alameda County Superior Court. Petitioner had filed a previous

federal habeas petition, challenging her 2003 conviction and sentence from Alameda County

Superior Court, which this court denied on the merits. See Juniel v. Felkner, No. 07-4542 RMW

(N.D. Cal. filed August 31, 2007). Because both petitions challenged the same 2013 conviction

and sentence, and petitioner has not presented an order from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

authorizing this court to consider any new claims, this court must dismiss the instant petition in

its entirety. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A).

CONCLUSION 

The instant habeas petition is DISMISSED without prejudice to refiling if petitioner

obtains the necessary order. The clerk shall terminate any pending motions and close the file. 

Petitioner has not shown “that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the

petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right [or] that jurists of reason would

find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling.” Slack v.

McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Accordingly, a certificate of appealability is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: _______________ 

RONALD M. WHYTE

United States District Judge 

9/22/2015

Case 5:15-cv-02917-RMW Document 11 Filed 09/22/15 Page 2 of 2