Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01764/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01764-0/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DONATO V. ESTRADA,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-06-1764 FCD CMK P

vs.

CALIFORNIA BOARD OF PRISON TERMS, et al.,

Respondents.

 / ORDER

Petitioner, Donato Estrada, filed a pro se federal habeas corpus petition pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 in this court on August 10, 2006. 

Mr. Estrada filed a previous federal habeas corpus application with this Court on

February 28, 2002. Estrada v. Terhune, No. Civ. S 02-0440 WBS JFM. The petition was denied

on the merits on August 16, 2004, and on January 1, 2006, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the

judgment. Because Mr. Estrada filed a previous federal habeas corpus application that was

denied on the merits, the application filed on August 10, 2006 is a “successive habeas corpus

application” within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 2244. Before filing such a petition, “the

applicant shall 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). 

Case 2:06-cv-01764-JKS Document 4 Filed 08/23/06 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

Because Mr. Estrada has not been granted leave by the Ninth Circuit to file a

second or successive habeas corpus application, this Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the

November 30, 2005 application. Cooper v. Calderon, 274 F.3d 1270, 1274 (9th Cir. 2001);

Nuñez v. United States, 96 F.3d 990, 991 (7th Cir. 1996). Accordingly, this action shall be

transferred, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631, to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. See United

States v. Barrett, 178 F.3d 34, 41 n.1 (1st Cir. 1999); Coleman v. United States, 106 F.3d 339,

341 (10th Cir. 1997) (per curiam); In re Sims, 111 F.3d 45, 47 (6th Cir. 1997); Liriano v. United

States, 95 F.3d 119, 122-23 (2d Cir. 1996).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: August 22, 2006.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-01764-JKS Document 4 Filed 08/23/06 Page 2 of 2