Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-02139/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-02139-0/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JERRY BRENTON NUTT,

Petitioner, No. 2:08-cv-2139 JFM (HC)

vs.

M. MARTEL, WARDEN, 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

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

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 an application for a

writ of habeas corpus attacking the 1997 conviction and sentence challenged in this case. The

previous application was filed on March 28, 2001, and was denied on the merits on June 11,

2003. Before petitioner can proceed with the instant application he must move in the United

States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for an order authorizing the district court to

Case 2:08-cv-02139-FCD-JFM Document 4 Filed 09/23/08 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

consider the application. 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.

IT IS ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to assign a district judge

to this case.

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: September 19, 2008.

/001; nutt2139.suc

Case 2:08-cv-02139-FCD-JFM Document 4 Filed 09/23/08 Page 2 of 2