Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-02359/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-02359-0/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 Santibanez v. Hickman, No. CIV S-00-0303 DFL DAD P. 1

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JASON V. SANTIBANEZ,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-07-2359 GEB JFM P

vs.

JOHN C. MARSHALL, ORDER AND

Respondent. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of

habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with a request to proceed in forma

pauperis.

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

afford the costs of suit. Accordingly, the request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is

granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).

The court’s records reveal that petitioner has previously filed two applications for

a writ of habeas corpus attacking the conviction and sentence challenged in this case. The first

application was filed on February 14, 2000, and was denied on the merits on June 9, 2004. The 1

Case 2:07-cv-02359-GEB -JFM Document 8 Filed 01/25/08 Page 1 of 3
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 Santibanez v. Woodford, CIV S-06-0766 LKK DAD P. 2

2

second application was filed on April 10, 2006, and was denied on June 22, 2006, as a second or 2

successive petition filed without authorization from the United States Court of Appeals for the

Ninth Circuit as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3). This action, too, was filed without the

required authorization from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. See 28

U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3). Therefore, petitioner’s application must be dismissed without prejudice to

its refiling upon obtaining authorization from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth

Circuit.

In light of the above, petitioner’s November 15, 2007 motion for appointment of

counsel and request for evidentiary hearing will also be denied without prejudice.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner's request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted; 

2. Petitioner’s November 15, 2007 motion for appointment of counsel is denied

without prejudice; 

3. Petitioner’s November 15, 2007 request for evidentiary hearing is denied

without prejudice;

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without

prejudice. 

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's

Findings and Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the

/////

/////

Case 2:07-cv-02359-GEB -JFM Document 8 Filed 01/25/08 Page 2 of 3
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

3

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: January 24, 2008.

001; sant2359.succ

Case 2:07-cv-02359-GEB -JFM Document 8 Filed 01/25/08 Page 3 of 3