1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 WILLIAM DEAUNTAE SHEHEE, ) Case No. CV 22-5293-SPG (JPR) 11 ) Petitioner, ) 12 ) ORDER SUMMARILY DISMISSING v. ) PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS 13 ) CORPUS BY PERSON IN STATE CUSTODY HEATHER SHIRLEY, Warden, ) 14 ) Respondent. ) 15 ) 16 17 On July 27, 2022, Petitioner, a state prisoner, filed a 18 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, raising a single claim: he 19 deserves resentencing consideration under recent California 20 Senate Bill 81. (Pet. at 5.) But in an earlier habeas action in 21 which Petitioner attempted to raise the same claim, the Court 22 already ruled that “Senate Bill 81 does not apply retroactively” 23 to convictions before its effective date of January 1, 2022, such 24 as Petitioner’s. Shehee v. Shirley, No. 2:20-cv-04945-SPG-JPR, 25

, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 21, 2022). The Court 26 also found that any claim concerning Senate Bill 81’s application 27 to Petitioner was not cognizable on federal habeas review because 28 it would concern state law only. See

1 Because it plainly appears that Petitioner is not entitled relief, the Petition is SUMMARILY DISMISSED.?+ 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: _April 12, 2023 A Z SHERILYN P. GARNETT 5 U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE 6 7 Presented by:? 8 9 10 11 Rrehlutt~ Jean P. Rosenbluth 12 U.S. Magistrate Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 * The Petition is likely impermissibly successive as well, see 25

(a) & (b), but the Court does not reach that issue. 26 * Under Local Rule 72-3.2, “if it plainly appears from the face of the petition and any exhibits annexed to it that the 27 petitioner is not entitled to relief, the Magistrate Judge may prepare a proposed order for summary dismissal and submit it anda 28 || proposed judgment to the District Judge.”