Carlton 340622 v. Arizona Department of Corrections

District Court, D. Arizona·Decided July 1, 2020·No. 3:20-cv-08088·Unknown

Opinion

1 WO ASH 2 3 4 5 8 9 Paul Carlton, No. CV 20-08088-PCT-MTL (MHB) 10 Petitioner, 11 v. ORDER 12 Arizona Department of Corrections, et 13 al., 14 Respondents.

15 16 On April 14, 2020, Petitioner Paul Carlton, who is confined in the Arizona State 17 Prison Complex-Eyman, filed a pro se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 18 U.S.C. § 2254 and, after being directed to do so, paid the filing fee. By Order dated May 19 18, 2020, the Court dismissed the Petition with leave to amend for lack of jurisdiction and 20 because Petitioner had failed to allege that any of his federal rights had been violated. 21 Petitioner was provided with 30 days in which to file an amended petition that cured the 22 deficiencies identified in the order. 23 On May 26, 2020, Petitioner filed an Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 24 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. By order dated June 12, 2020, the Court dismissed the 25 Petition with leave to amend because Petitioner had again failed to allege that any of his 26 federal rights had been violated. Petitioner was provided with 30 days in which to file a 27 second amended petition that cured the deficiencies identified in the order. 28 Petitioner has now filed a Second Amended Petitioner (Doc. 13). The Court will 1 dismiss the Second Amended Petition without prejudice and with leave to amend. 2 I. Second Amended Petition 3 Petitioner was convicted in Mohave County Superior Court, case #CR-2019-924, of 4 attempted molestation of a minor and sexual exploitation of a minor. In his Second 5 Amended Petition, Petitioner names the Arizona Department of Corrections Director 6 David Shinn as Respondent and the Arizona Attorney General as an Additional 7 Respondent. Petitioner raises one ground for relief. 8 II. Failure to Allege a Constitutional Violation 9 Section 2254(a), 28 U.S.C., requires the Court to “entertain an application for a writ 10 of habeas corpus [o]n behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State 11 court only on the ground that he is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws 12 or treaties of the United States.” (Emphasis added.) As with his previous petitions, 13 Petitioner yet again fails to allege that he is in custody in violation of the Constitution or 14 the laws or treaties of the United States. Thus, the Court lacks jurisdiction over this case 15 and will dismiss it. 16 III. Leave to Amend 17 Within 30 days, Petitioner may submit a third amended petition to cure the 18 deficiency outlined above. The Clerk of Court will mail Petitioner a court-approved form 19 to use for filing an amended petition. 20 If Petitioner files a third amended petition, he must use the court-approved form, set 21 forth each claim in a separate ground, and specifically allege in each ground the particular 22 federal constitutional right allegedly violated, with supporting facts. For example, if 23 Petitioner claims his due process rights are violated, he must also include the federal rights 24 violated, such as the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. 25 Likewise, if Petitioner claims his right to effective assistance of counsel was violated, he 26 must also include the federal right violated, such as the Sixth Amendment of the United 27 States Constitution. If Petitioner again fails to allege that he is in custody in violation of 28 the Constitution or the laws or treaties of the United States, this action will be dismissed. 1 If Petitioner fails to file his third amended petition on the court-approved form 2 included with this Order, it will be stricken and the action dismissed without further notice 3 to Petitioner. 4 The third amended petition must be retyped or rewritten in its entirety on the court- 5 approved form and may not incorporate any part of any previous petition by reference. A 6 third amended petition submitted by Petitioner should be clearly designated as such on the 7 face of the document. 8 A third amended petition supersedes all previous petitions. Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 9 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992); Hal Roach Studios v. Richard Feiner & Co., Inc., 896 10 F.2d 1542, 1546 (9th Cir. 1990). After amendment, all previous petitions will be treated 11 as nonexistent. Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1262. Any ground for relief that was raised in a 12 previous petition and that was voluntarily dismissed or was dismissed without prejudice is 13 waived if it is not alleged in the third amended petition. Lacey v. Maricopa County, 693 14 F.3d 896, 928 (9th Cir. 2012) (en banc). 15 IV. Warnings 16 A. Address Changes 17 If Petitioner’s address changes, Petitioner must file and serve a notice of a change 18 of address in accordance with Rule 83.3(d) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure. 19 Petitioner must not include a motion for other relief with a notice of change of address. 20 Failure to comply may result in dismissal of this action. 21 B. Possible Dismissal 22 If Petitioner fails to timely comply with every provision of this Order, including 23 these warnings, the Court may dismiss this action without further notice. See Ferdik, 963 24 F.2d at 1260-61 (a district court may dismiss an action for failure to comply with any order 25 of the Court). 26 IT IS ORDERED: 27 (1) Petitioner’s Second Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 13) 28 is dismissed without prejudice, with leave to amend. Petitioner has 30 days from the date this Order is filed to file a third amended petition. 2 (2) The Clerk of Court must enter a judgment of dismissal without prejudice of this action, without further notice to Petitioner, if Petitioner fails to submit a third amended 4 petition on the court-approved form within 30 days from the filing date of this Order and 5 deny any pending unrelated motions as moot. 6 (3) | The Clerk of Court must send Petitioner the current court-approved form for filing a “Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State 8 Custody (Non-Death Penalty).” 9 Dated this Ist day of July, 2020. 10 Wichak T. gihuade Michael T. Liburdi 13 United States District Judge 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. If you want to challenge a federal conviction or sentence, you should file a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate sentence in the federal court that entered the judgment. This form should not be used in death penalty cases. If you were sentenced to death, you are entitled to the assistance of counsel and you should request the appointment of counsel.

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

Carlton 340622 v. Arizona Department of Corrections, (D. Ariz. 2020).

Carlton 340622 v. Arizona Department of Corrections (Carlton 340622 v. Arizona Department of Corrections) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Leonard A. Pelullo
14 F.3d 881 (Third Circuit, 1994)