Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-00460/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-00460-0/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

27

28

K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\JAH\11cv0460 successive.wpd, 32811 -1- 11cv0460

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JERRY WAYNE YOUNG, Civil No. 11-0460 JAH (NLS)

Petitioner,

SUMMARY DISMISSAL OF

SUCCESSIVE PETITION PURSUANT

TO 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A)

GATEKEEPER PROVISION

vs.

MATTHEW CATE, Secretary,

Respondent

Petitioner, Jerry Wayne Young, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a Petition for

Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 together with a request to proceed in forma

pauperis. The Court does not rule on Petitioner’s request to proceed in forma pauperis because

this case is summarily dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A) as indicated below. 

PETITION BARRED BY GATEKEEPER PROVISION

The instant Petition is not the first Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Petitioner has

submitted to this Court challenging his January 10, 2000, conviction in San Diego Superior

Court case No. SCD145402. On February 5, 2002, Petitioner filed in this Court a Petition for

Writ of Habeas Corpus in case No. 02cv0225. In that petition, Petitioner challenged his

conviction in San Diego Superior Court case No. SCD 145402 as well. On September 1, 2004,

this Court denied the petition on the merits. (See Order filed September 1, 2004, in case No.

02cv0225 BTM (JFS) [Doc. No. 84].) Petitioner did not appeal that determination. 

Case 3:11-cv-00460-JAH-NLS Document 6 Filed 03/28/11 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

K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\JAH\11cv0460 successive.wpd, 32811 -2- 11cv0460

Petitioner is now seeking to challenge the same conviction he challenged in his prior

federal habeas petition. Unless a petitioner shows he or she has obtained an Order from the

appropriate court of appeals authorizing the district court to consider a successive petition, the

petition may not be filed in the district court. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). Here, there is no

indication the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has granted Petitioner leave to file a successive

petition.

CONCLUSION

Because there is no indication Petitioner has obtained permission from the Ninth Circuit

Court of Appeals to file a successive petition, this Court cannot consider his Petition.

Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES this action without prejudice to Petitioner filing a petition

in this court if he obtains the necessary order from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Clerk

of Court is directed to send Petitioner a blank Ninth Circuit Application for Leave to File

Second or Successive Petition.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: March 25, 2011

JOHN A. HOUSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:11-cv-00460-JAH-NLS Document 6 Filed 03/28/11 Page 2 of 2