Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_10-cv-02921/USCOURTS-cand-3_10-cv-02921-0/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)

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ISHMAEL ZAKAT TURNER,

Petitioner,

v.

SAN QUENTIN WARDEN, 

Respondent. /

No. C 10-2921 MHP (pr)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

Ishmael Zakat Turner has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus to challenge his

conviction and sentence in San Mateo County Superior Court in 1992 for sexual assault in

concert. 

This is not Turner's first challenge to his 1992 conviction. He also challenged it in an

action filed in 2008, Turner v. Ayers, C 08-1226 MHP, that was dismissed on July 18, 2008. 

He did not appeal from that 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). 

Turner 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 Turner

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

DISMISSED without prejudice to Turner filing a petition in this court after he obtains the

necessary order from the Ninth Circuit. 

Case 3:10-cv-02921-MHP Document 3 Filed 07/13/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

If Turner wants to attempt to obtain the necessary order from the Ninth Circuit, he

should very clearly mark the first page of his document as a "MOTION FOR ORDER

AUTHORIZING DISTRICT COURT TO CONSIDER SECOND OR SUCCESSIVE

PETITION PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A)" rather than labeling it as a habeas

petition because the Ninth Circuit clerk's office is apt to simply forward to this court any

document labeled as a habeas petition. He also should mail the motion to the Ninth Circuit

(at 95 Seventh Street, San Francisco, CA 94103), rather than to this court. In his motion to

the Ninth Circuit, he should explain how he meets the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b).

The clerk shall close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: July 9, 2010 

Marilyn Hall Patel

United States District Judge

Case 3:10-cv-02921-MHP Document 3 Filed 07/13/10 Page 2 of 2