United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, 2020

(HC) Jaborie Brown v. Warden

(HC) Jaborie Brown v. Warden
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · Decided August 24, 2020
(HC) Jaborie Brown v. Warden

Trial Court Opinion

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JABORIE BROWN, ) Case No.: 1:20-cv-01156-JLT (HC) ) 12 Petitioner, ) ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO ) ASSIGN DISTRICT JUDGE 13 v. ) ) FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO WARDEN, ) DISMISS PETITION AS DUPLICATIVE AND 15 Respondent. ) SUCCESSIVE ) 16 ) [TEN-DAY OBJECTION PERIOD] 18 On August 18, 2020, Petitioner filed the instant habeas petition in this Court. (Doc. 1.)

19 Petitioner challenges his March 31, 2005 conviction. Petitioner is already proceeding with a petition challenging this conviction in Brown v. Warden of U.S.P. Atwater, Case No. 1:20-cv-00233-SAB (HC). In that action, the matter is awaiting a response from Respondent.

22 Review of the petitions filed in both actions reveals that the instant petition duplicates the prior petition. A federal court must dismiss a second or successive petition that raises the same grounds as a prior petition. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(1).

25 ORDER 26 Accordingly, the Court DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to assign a District Judge to the case.

27 RECOMMENDATION 28 The Court RECOMMENDS that the petition be dismissed as duplicative and successive.

1 This Findings and Recommendation is submitted to the United States District Court Judge assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Rule 304 of the Local Rules of Practice for the United States District Court, Eastern District of California. Within ten days after being served with a copy, Petitioner may file written objections with the Court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation.”

6 The Court will then review the Magistrate Judge’s ruling pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C).

7 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).

10 IT IS SO ORDERED.

11 Dated: August 24, 2020 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 12 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.