Gamboa v. Miller-Stout
This text of 279 F. App'x 569 (Gamboa v. Miller-Stout) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Washington state prisoner Efren Lopez Gamboa appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as second or successive. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.
As an initial matter, we reject Lopez Gamboa’s contention that 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b) does not apply to petitions challenging state prison administrative decisions. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b). Furthermore, we conclude that the district court properly dismissed Lopez Gamboa’s federal habeas petition as second or successive without authorization. See id; Babbitt v. Woodford, 177 F.3d 744, 745-47 (9th Cir.1999).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
279 F. App'x 569, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gamboa-v-miller-stout-ca9-2008.