(HC) Cepeda v. Bonta

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DAVID DANIEL CEPEDA, Case No. 2:23-cv-02014-DAD-JDP (HC) 12 Petitioner, ORDER 13 v. ROB BONTA, 15 Respondent.

17 Petitioner, who is living in New Mexico and appears to no longer be incarcerated, seeks a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. After reviewing his initial petition, I find that it fails to state a cognizable claim. I will give him leave to amend before recommending the petition be dismissed, however. Additionally, I will grant his application to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF No. 2.

22 The petition is before me for preliminary review under Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. Under Rule 4, the judge assigned to the habeas proceeding must examine the habeas petition and order a response to the petition unless it “plainly appears” that the petitioner is not entitled to relief. See Valdez v. Montgomery, 918 F.3d 687, 693 (9th Cir. 2019); Boyd v. Thompson, 147 F.3d 1124, 1127 (9th Cir. 1998).

27 Petitioner raises claims related to a 2008 conviction and his placement on a sex offender registry. ECF No. 1 at 1-2, 4-5. The latter claims are not cognizable because placement on a sex | offender registry does not render petitioner “in custody” for habeas purposes, and section 2254 || relief is thus unavailable on those claims. See Williamson v. Gregoire, 151 F.3d 1180, 1183 (9th | Cir. 1998). And, given that this petition was filed in September 2023, any claims related to || petitioner’s conviction in 2008 appear, even allowing for possible tolling, well past the one-year | statute of limitations for federal habeas actions set by the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death | Penalty Act. See Pace v. DiGuglielmo, 544 U.S. 408, 410 (2005).

7 I will give petitioner an opportunity to amend and explain why this action should still || proceed.

9 It is ORDERED that: 10 1. The Clerk of Court is directed to send petitioner a federal § 2254 habeas form.

11 2. Within thirty days of this order’s entry, petitioner may file an amended habeas | petition. If he does not, I will recommend this action be dismissed.

13 3. Petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 2, is GRANTED.

1s IT IS SO ORDERED.

16 | q Sty — Dated: _ November 30, 2023 Q_-——— 17 JEREMY D. PETERSON 18 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE