Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-1_16-cv-00924/USCOURTS-cand-1_16-cv-00924-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
People of the State of California
Defendant
Brian Schmeltz
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

EUREKA DIVISION

BRIAN SCHMELTZ,

Petitioner,

v.

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF 

CALIFORNIA,

Respondent.

Case No. 16-cv-00924-NJV

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION

On February 24, 2016, Petitioner filed a Petition for Judicial Review (Doc. 1), in which he 

requests that the court overturn his 1992 felony conviction in Napa County Superior Court, Napa, 

California. On March 9, 2016, Petitioner consented to the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant 

to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). After a review of the Petition, and for the following reasons, the court 

dismisses this action.

I. BACKGROUND

According to the Petition, in 1992, Petitioner pled guilty to and was convicted of violating 

Section 288 of the California Penal Code in Napa County Superior Court. According to 

Petitioner, the factual basis of his conviction was that he and his wife sexually molested their 

minor daughter with a foreign object. Petitioner now contends that his daughter has recanted her 

previous allegations and requests that the court “issue a writ of Coram Vobis directing the 

judgment and sentence in Napa County . . . be vacated and set aside.” Pet. (Doc. 1) at 11.

II. DISCUSSION

“Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. They possess only that power authorized 

by Constitution and statute.” Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 

Case 1:16-cv-00924-NJV Document 6 Filed 03/23/16 Page 1 of 4
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

(1994). This is why Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires “a short and plain 

statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction.” Further, “[i]f the court determines at any 

time that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 

12(h)(3).

Here, Petitioner has failed to provide the court with a short and plain statement of the 

grounds for the court’s jurisdiction and none is apparent. Petitioner states that he is seeking a writ 

of Coram Vobis. However, Rule 60(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure states that “[t]he 

following are abolished: bills of review, bills in the nature of bills of review, and writs of coram 

nobis, coram vobis, and audita querela.” 

Instead, Petitioner’s request is based solely on a state court writ. Petitioner specifically 

relies on California Penal Code Section 1473.6 as the basis for this Petition. Indeed, all of 

Petitioner’s requests are based solely on state court rules or state laws. For example, Petitioner

asserts that he may ask this court to take judicial notice of the “new evidence in Appeal Number 

A139726 [u]nder California Rules of Court 8.500.” Pet. (Doc. 1) at 1. In addition, Petitioner 

moves under California Evidence Code 1018PC to withdraw his plea of no contest, in his 1992 

conviction and under California Evidence Code 410PC to re-open his original case in Napa 

County. The court cannot apply these California rules to this action. Indeed, none of these rules, 

laws, or statutes provide this court with jurisdiction over the Petition.

Moreover, Petitioner states that his appeal, A139726 is “currently in the possession of the 

California State Criminal Appeals Panel Court, First Appellate District, Division Three.” Id. The 

Petition requests that this court direct judgment in appeal A139726 to vacate his 1992 conviction. 

Such a request runs afoul of the Younger Doctrine, which “reaffirmed the long-standing principle 

that federal courts sitting in equity cannot, absent exceptional circumstances, enjoin pending state 

criminal proceedings.” ReadyLink Healthcare, Inc. v. State Comp. Ins. Fund, 754 F.3d 754, 758 

(9th Cir. 2014). In other words, not only has Petitioner failed to provide this court a basis for 

jurisdiction, but even if he could, the substantive request within the Petition is impermissible.

//

//

Case 1:16-cv-00924-NJV Document 6 Filed 03/23/16 Page 2 of 4
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

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

III. CONCLUSION

For the above stated reasons the court determines that it does not have jurisdiction over this 

matter. As my English brethren might say, “I can’t hear you.” Accordingly, this Petition is 

DISMISSED without leave to amend.

A separate judgment shall issue. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 23, 2016

______________________________________

NANDOR J. VADAS

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 1:16-cv-00924-NJV Document 6 Filed 03/23/16 Page 3 of 4
4

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRIAN SCHMELTZ,

Petitioner,

v.

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF 

CALIFORNIA,

Defendant.

Case No. 16-cv-00924-NJV 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in, U.S. District Court, Northern

District of California.

That on March 23, 2016, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by 

placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by 

depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery 

receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

Brian Schmeltz

1127 Sage Road

Colfax, CA 95713 

Dated: March 23, 2016

Susan Y. Soong

Clerk, United States District Court

By:________________________

Robert Illman, Clerk to the 

Honorable NANDOR J. VADAS

Case 1:16-cv-00924-NJV Document 6 Filed 03/23/16 Page 4 of 4