Brabham v. Arizona, State of

CourtDistrict Court, D. Arizona
DecidedDecember 16, 2019
Docket2:19-cv-05465
StatusUnknown

This text of Brabham v. Arizona, State of (Brabham v. Arizona, State of) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Arizona primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Brabham v. Arizona, State of, (D. Ariz. 2019).

Opinion

1 WO SC 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Terry Lynell Brabham, Jr., No. CV 19-05465-PHX-MTL (ESW) 10 Petitioner, 11 v. ORDER 12 State of Arizona, 13 Respondent.

14 15 Terry Lynell Brabham, Jr., who is confined in the Arizona State Prison Complex, 16 Whetstone Unit, in Tucson, Arizona, has filed pro se document captioned as a “First 17 Motion to Proceed for Habeas Corpus Relief as to Exhausted All State Court Remedies” 18 (“Motion”). The Clerk of Court opened a civil case to facilitate consideration of 19 Petitioner’s Motion. The Court will deny the Motion and dismiss this case without 20 prejudice to Petitioner commencing a new case by filing a Petition for Writ of Habeas 21 Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, using the court-approved form, and either paying the 22 $5.00 filing fee or filing an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Habeas), using the 23 court-approved form. 24 I. Habeas Corpus Relief 25 A petitioner may file a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 26 § 2254 if he believes that he was convicted or sentenced in violation of his constitutional 27 rights. Federal habeas relief is available “only on the ground that [an inmate] is in custody 28 in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. 1 § 2254(a). Thus, “[c]hallenges to the validity of any confinement or to particulars affecting 2 its duration are the province of habeas corpus . . . .” Muhammad v. Close, 540 U.S. 749, 3 750 (2004). Petitioner is informed that a one-year statute of limitation to file a federal 4 habeas corpus petition runs from the latter of “the date on which the [state court] judgment 5 became final by the conclusion of direct review or the expiration of the time for seeking 6 such review,” 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1), excluding “[t]he time during which a properly filed 7 application for State post-conviction or other collateral review with respect to the pertinent 8 judgment or claim is pending.” 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(2); see Woodford v. Garceau, 538 9 U.S. 202, 206-207 (2003); Isley v. Arizona Dep’t of Corr., 383 F.3d 1054, 1055 (2004).1 10 Petitioner is further informed that a petitioner seeking habeas corpus relief under 28 11 U.S.C. § 2254 must name the state officer having custody of him as the respondent to the 12 petition. See Rule 2(a), Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases; Belgarde v. Montana, 123 13 F.3d 1210, 1212 (9th Cir. 1997). Typically, this person is the warden of the institution 14 where the petitioner is incarcerated. When a habeas petitioner has failed to name a 15 respondent who has the power to order the petitioner’s release, the Court “may not grant 16 effective relief, and thus should not hear the case unless the petition is amended to name a 17 respondent who can grant the desired relief.” Smith v. Idaho, 392 F.3d 350, 355 n.3 (9th 18 Cir. 2004). 19 Lastly, pursuant to Rule 3.5(a) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure, a habeas 20 corpus petitioner is required to use a court-approved form when he files a pro se petition 21 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. If Petitioner wishes to seek habeas corpus relief, he must 22 commence a new case by filing a “Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas 23 Corpus by a Person in State Custody (Non-Death Penalty)” using the court-approved form. 24 The Clerk of Court will send the court-approved form to Petitioner. 25 26 1 Petitioner should assess whether he complied with state filing rules in any Rule 32 proceedings because, although the one-year statute of limitations for filing a habeas corpus 27 case is tolled during the pendency of a properly filed application for state post-conviction relief and a properly filed petition for review of the denial of Rule 32 relief, the one-year 28 statute of limitations is not tolled for the period during the pendency of an improperly filed Rule 32 proceeding or an improperly filed petition for review. 1 II. Filing Fee 2 Rule 3.5(b) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure requires that “[i]f a habeas corpus 3 petitioner desires to prosecute the petition in forma pauperis, the petitioner [must] file an 4 application to proceed in forma pauperis on a form approved by the Court, accompanied 5 by a certification of the warden or other appropriate officer of the institution in which the 6 petitioner is confined as to the amount of money or securities on deposit to the petitioner’s 7 credit.” Rule 3.5(b) requires a petitioner to pay the $5.00 filing fee if the petitioner has in 8 excess of $25.00 in his inmate account. 9 If Petitioner wishes to seek habeas corpus relief, he must commence a new case by 10 either paying the $5.00 filing fee or filing an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis 11 (Habeas) using the court-approved form. The Clerk of Court will send the court-approved 12 form to Petitioner. 13 IT IS ORDERED: 14 (1) Petitioner’s “First Motion to Proceed for Habeas Corpus Relief as to 15 Exhausted All State Court Remedies” (Doc. 1) is denied and this action is dismissed 16 without prejudice. 17 (2) The Clerk of Court must enter a judgment of dismissal without prejudice of 18 this action. 19 (3) Pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, in the 20 event Petitioner files an appeal, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability 21 because reasonable jurists would not find the Court’s procedural ruling debatable. See 22 Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). 23 /// 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// 1 (4) The Clerk of Court must mail Petitioner: (1) the court-approved form for 2| filing a “Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State | Custody (Non-Death Penalty)”; and (2) the court-approved form for filing an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Habeas). 5 Dated this 16th day of December, 2019. 6 WMichak T. Shure Michak T. gihunde Michael T. Liburdi 9 United States District Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 _4-

Instructions for Filing a Petition Under 28 U.S.C. ' 2254 for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona

1. Who May Use This Form. To use this form, you must be a person who is currently serving a sentence under a judgment against you in a state court. You are asking for relief from the conviction or the sentence on the grounds that your conviction or sentence violates the United States Constitution or other federal law. You also may use this form to challenge a state judgment that imposed a sentence to be served in the future, but you must fill in the name of the state where the judgment was entered.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Slack v. McDaniel
529 U.S. 473 (Supreme Court, 2000)
Muhammad v. Close
540 U.S. 749 (Supreme Court, 2004)
Ramon L. Smith v. State of Idaho
392 F.3d 350 (Ninth Circuit, 2004)
United States v. Vue
13 F.3d 1206 (Eighth Circuit, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Brabham v. Arizona, State of, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brabham-v-arizona-state-of-azd-2019.