Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-02786/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-02786-0/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 Brown v. Pliler, No. CIV S-99-1858 WBS DAD P. 1

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KARENGA BROWN,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-07-2786 LKK JFM P

vs.

JAMES TILTON, Secretary,

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. Petitioner has neither paid the $5.00 filing fee for

this action nor filed a request to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

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 September 22, 1999, and was denied on the merits on August 12, 2002.1

The second application was filed on May 11, 2006, and was dismissed on November 28, 2007, as

a second or 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

Case 2:07-cv-02786-LKK -JFM Document 5 Filed 01/25/08 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

2

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.

Accordingly, 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

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.

12

brow2786.succ

Case 2:07-cv-02786-LKK -JFM Document 5 Filed 01/25/08 Page 2 of 2