Shawn v. Bean

Opinion

3 Rick Shawn, Case No.: 2:22-cv-02157-APG-DJA

4 Petitioner Order Denying Motion for Reconsideration and Denying Motion for Clarification 5 v. [ECF Nos. 7, 8] 6 Jeromy Bean, et al.,

7 Respondents

8 On January 19, 2023, I dismissed Rick Shawn’s pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus, 9 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, and judgment was entered. ECF Nos. 4, 6. Shawn now moves for 10 reconsideration, and I deny the motion for lack of jurisdiction. 11 I dismissed the petition as second and successive to the federal petition that was 12 dismissed in February 2018 challenging the same judgment of conviction. See 2:14-cv-00738- 13 JAD-PAL. Shawn was required to obtain authorization from the United States Court of Appeals 14 for the Ninth Circuit before he could file another petition in this court. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3). 15 He did not indicate that he received such authorization. In his motion for reconsideration, he re- 16 argues the merits of his challenge to his conviction and sentence. But as I explained previously, I 17 lack jurisdiction to consider the new petition without the court of appeals giving Shawn leave to 18 file another petition in this court. See Burton v. Stewart, 549 U.S. 147 at 152 (9th Cir. 2007). 19 Shawn also filed what he styled a motion for clarification. ECF No. 8. It is unclear what he seeks 20 in that motion, but in any event it is moot in light of the denial of reconsideration. 21 22 23 1 I THEREFORE ORDER that petitioner’s motion for reconsideration [ECF No. 7] is 2} DENIED. 3 I FURTHER ORDER that petitioner’s motion for clarification [ECF No. 8] is DENIED. 4 I FURTHER ORDER that a certificate of appealability is denied. 5 DATED this 15" day of May, 2023.

7 ANDREW P. GORDON g UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23