Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_01-cv-02414/USCOURTS-azd-2_01-cv-02414-0/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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Ray Maurice Brown, 

Petitioner, 

vs.

Charles Ryan, et al., 

Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 01-2414-PHX-EHC

ORDER

On May 2, 2003, the Court adopted in full the Report and Recommendation of the

Magistrate Judge regarding Petitioner’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28

U.S.C. § 2254 (Dkt. 36 - Order). In the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 33) filed on

March 19, 2003, the Magistrate Judge recommended that the Petition be denied without an

evidentiary hearing and dismissed with prejudice as not properly exhausted and procedurally

barred. The Court’s May 2, 2003 Order (Dkt. 36 - Order) denied the Petition with prejudice.

Judgment (Dkt. 37) was entered on May 2, 2003. 

On May 27, 2003, Petitioner filed a Notice of Appeal (Dkt. 40) and a Motion for

Relief from Judgment (Dkt. 38). On May 30, 2003, the Court denied a Certificate of

Appealability (Dkt. 41). Petitioner’s Motion for Relief from Judgment was denied as moot

(Dkt. 42 - Order) on June 20, 2003. On August 22, 2003, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth

Circuit denied Petitioner’s request for a Certificate of Appealability (Dkt. 43).

Case 2:01-cv-02414-DJH Document 47 Filed 06/17/10 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 - 2 -

On January 11, 2010, Petitioner filed a “Motion for: Relief from Judgment or Order”

(Dkt. 44) which is now pending before the Court. Petitioner appears to be requesting that his

habeas case be re-opened and that the merits of his claims be reconsidered. Petitioner argues

that he is submitting “more thoroughly that the alleged constitutional violations [have]

resulted in a miscarriage of justice to the extent it has resulted in the conviction and

imprisonment of the petitioner who is innocent” (Dkt. 44 - Motion at 4). Petitioner’s claim

of actual innocence is discussed in the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 33 at 14-15).

Petitioner has not asserted grounds in his present motion that justify relief under Fed.R.Civ.P.

60(b).

To the extent Petitioner is seeking leave to file a second or successive habeas

application, 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A) provides that “[b]efore a second or successive

[habeas] application ... is filed in the district court, the applicant shall move in the appropriate

court of appeals for an order authorizing the district court to consider the application.”

Petitioner therefore must file his application in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Petitioner

will be provided with the appropriate form for filing an application for leave to file a second

or successive petition. Petitioner’s “Motion for: Relief from Judgment or Order” (Dkt. 44)

will be denied without prejudice.

 Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s “Motion for: Relief from Judgment or Order”

(Dkt. 44) is denied without prejudice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall provide Petitioner with

the appropriate form for filing an Application for Leave to File Second or Successive Petition

under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

DATED this 17th day of June, 2010.

Case 2:01-cv-02414-DJH Document 47 Filed 06/17/10 Page 2 of 2