Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00053/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00053-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Unknown
Respondent
Jason David Yonai
Petitioner

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JASON DAVID YONAI, No. CIV S-07-0053-DFL-CMK-P

Petitioner, 

vs. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Unknown,

Respondent.

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of

habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Pending before the court is petitioner’s petition

(Doc. 1), filed on January 9, 2007. Petitioner has also filed a number of motions and requests in

this docket (Docs. 6, 7, 8, and 14). 

In his petition, petitioner states that he is challenging a state court criminal

conviction entered on July 3, 2002, following a no contest plea. It appears that petitioner is

raising the following claim: “false evidence of unprobable cause.” A review of the court’s

records reveals that petitioner has filed at least four other habeas corpus petitions challenging the

July 3, 2002, conviction. Those cases are: (1) Yonai v. Evans, CIV S-06-0870-MCE-DAD; 

(2) Yonai v. Evans, CIV S-06-1250-RRB-CMK; (3) Yonai v. Evans, CIV S-06-2760-DFL-KJM;

Case 2:07-cv-00053-JKS-CMK Document 15 Filed 06/15/07 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

Case no. 06-0870 has been dismissed for failure to exhaust state court remedies. 1

The court has recommended dismissal of case no. 06-2760 as duplicative of case no. 06-1250. 

The court has recommended dismissal of case no. 06-1250 based on petitioner’s failure to

respond to court order. 

2

and (4) Yonai v. Evans, CIV S-06-2940-DFL-KJM. In each of these petitions, petitioner raises

1

the same “false evidence” claim. Therefore, the instant petition is duplicative of at least one of

the petitions filed in 2006. 

Based on the foregoing, the undersigned recommends that:

1. The instant petition be dismissed as duplicative of an earlier-filed petition;

and

2. All pending motions be denied as moot.

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 20 days

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's

Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive

the right to appeal. See Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: June 14, 2007.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:07-cv-00053-JKS-CMK Document 15 Filed 06/15/07 Page 2 of 2