Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02847/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02847-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Dennis Roy White
Petitioner
James A. Yates
Respondent

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

 White v. Lewis, CIV S-02-2071 GEB KJM P

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DENNIS ROY WHITE,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-06-2847 GEB KJM P 

vs.

JAMES A. YATES, et al.,

Respondents. FINDINGS AND 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 conviction and sentence challenged in this case.1 The

previous application was filed on September 20, 2002, and was denied on the merits on

Case 2:06-cv-02847-GEB-KJM Document 6 Filed 03/27/07 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

2

September 20, 2005. 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 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.

Accordingly, 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: March 26, 2007. 

1

whit2071.suc

Case 2:06-cv-02847-GEB-KJM Document 6 Filed 03/27/07 Page 2 of 2