Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-00002/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-00002-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Gregory Lee Gray
Petitioner
People of the State of California
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 

27 

28 

United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

GREGORY LEE GRAY, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF 

CALIFORNIA, 

Respondent. 

Case No. 16-cv-00002-PJH 

ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO 

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND 

DISMISSING CASE 

Re: Dkt. Nos. 2, 3 

This is a habeas case brought pro se by a state prisoner regarding his 1997 

conviction. Petitioner filed a previous case attacking the same judgment, Gray v. 

Runnels, C 01-2880 PJH (PR). That case was dismissed as barred by the statute of 

limitations and the dismissal was affirmed on appeal. 

A subsequent habeas petition directed to the same conviction, Gray v. Felker, 09-

2461 PJH (PR), was dismissed by this court as second or successive. Petitioner did not 

appeal that dismissal. 

Petitioner then filed another petition attacking the same judgment, Gray v. 

McDonald, 10-0845 PJH (PR). As petitioner still had not obtained an order from the 

Ninth Circuit allowing him to file a second or successive petition, it also was dismissed. 

This court denied petitioner’s motions for a certificate of appealability and for leave to 

proceed in forma pauperis on appeal, and in October of 2010 the Ninth Circuit issued an 

order declining to grant a certificate of appealability, terminating the appeal. The United 

States Supreme Court subsequently denied his petition for certiorari. 

Petitioner filed additional habeas petitions, Gray v. McDonald, 10-5748 PJH (PR) 

and Gray v. Spearman, 14-2437 PJH (PR), that were also dismissed as second or 

Case 4:16-cv-00002-PJH Document 4 Filed 01/12/16 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

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 

suc

ap

cer

firs

filin

the

GR

DIS

the

Mc

Da

\\CA

_dis

ccessive. T

pealability 

rtiorari in G

A habe

st obtains fr

ng. See 28

e Ninth Circ

RANTED. T

SMISSED f

e result here

cDaniel, 529

IT IS S

ated: Janua

ANDOAK\Data\U

s.docx 

This court a

in both cas

Gray v. Spea

eas petition

rom the app

8 U.S.C. § 2

cuit. Theref

Petitioner’s

The motion

for the reas

e debatable

9 U.S. 473,

SO ORDER

ry 12, 2016

sers\PJHALL\_p

and the Nin

es. The Un

arman, 14-2

er may not

propriate U

2244(b)(3)(A

fore this ca

s motion for

n for a stay 

sons set ou

e, a certifica

, 484-85 (2

RED. 

6

psp\2016\2016_0

2

th Circuit d

nited States

2437 PJH (

 file a seco

nited States

A). Petition

se is dismis

CONCLU

r leave to p

(Docket No

t above. B

ate of appe

000) (stand

00002_Gray_v_P

denied his re

s Supreme 

(PR). 

ond or succe

s Court of A

ner has still

ssed. 

USION 

proceed in f

o. 3) is DEN

ecause rea

ealability (“C

dard for CO

PH

Un

People_of_the_S

equests for

Court deni

essive petit

Appeals an

l not obtain

forma paup

NIED and th

asonable ju

COA”) is DE

OA). The cl

HYLLIS J. H

nited States

State_of_Californ

r a certificat

ied his petit

tion unless 

n order auth

ed such an

peris (Docke

he petition i

rists would

ENIED. Se

erk shall clo

HAMILTON

s District Ju

ia_(PSP)\16-cvte of 

tion for 

he or she 

horizing the

n order from

et No. 2) is 

is 

 not find 

ee Slack v. 

ose the file

N

udge 

00002-PJHm

. 

Case 4:16-cv-00002-PJH Document 4 Filed 01/12/16 Page 2 of 2