1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GREGORY C. BONTEMPS, No. 2:24-cv-1459 CKD P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER AND 14 PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CA, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas 18 corpus pursuant to

. He has paid the filing fee. 19 Under Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, the court must review all 20 petitions for writ of habeas corpus and summarily dismiss any petition if it is plain that the 21 petitioner is not entitled to relief. The court has conducted that review. 22 Court records reveal that petitioner has previously filed a petition for a writ of habeas 23 corpus attacking the convictions and sentence challenged in this case and that the petition was 24 decided on the merits. See Bontemps v. McDonald, No. 2:12-cv-1480 TLN GGH P. Before 25 petitioner can proceed with the instant successive petition, he must obtain authorization from 26 United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit pursuant to

(b)(3). Because 27 it does not appear that petitioner has obtained the required authorization, petitioner’s habeas 28 petition must be dismissed. ] Accordingly, IT IS HERBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court assign a district court 2 || judge to this case. 3 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. 4 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 5 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of

(b)(1). Within fourteen days 6 || after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written 7 || objections with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate 8 | Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” In his objections petitioner may address whether a 9 || certificate of appealability should issue in the event he files an appeal of the judgment in this 10 || case. See Rule 11, Federal Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases (the district court must issue or 11 || deny a certificate of appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the applicant). Where, as 12 || here, a habeas petition is dismissed on procedural grounds, a certificate of appealability “should 13 || issue if the prisoner can show: (1) ‘that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the 14 | district court was correct in its procedural ruling;’ and (2) ‘that jurists of reason would find it 15 || debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right.’” Morris 16 | v. Woodford,

(9th Cir. 2000) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel,

, 484 17 | (2000)). Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive 18 || the nght to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst,

(9th Cir. 1991). 19 | Dated: July 3, 2024 □□ Ge 20 AMID fe IA 1 CAROLYN K. DELANEY |, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

73 bont1846.suc

24 25 26 27 28