Tshombe Kelley v. Iason Schultz, Warden

District Court, N.D. California·Decided April 29, 2026·No. 3:26-cv-03357·Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 TSHOMBE KELLEY, T06593, Case No. 26-cv-03357-CRB (PR) 7 Petitioner, ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR 8 v. A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AS 9 IASON SCHULTZ, Warden, SECOND OR SUCCESSIVE PETITION 10 Respondent. 11 Petitioner, a state prisoner incarcerated at California State Prison, Sacramento (SAC), has 12 || filed a second or successive petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 13 || challenging a January 2001, conviction and sentence from Alameda County Superior Court. His S 14 first petition under § 2254 was denied on the merits on March 9, 2006. See Kelley v. Lamarque, 3 15 || No. 04-cv-01540-VRW (N.D. Cal. Mar. 9, 2006) (order denying petition). 16 A second or successive petition may not be filed in this court unless petitioner first obtains 5 17. || from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit an order authorizing this court to 5 18 || consider the petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). This court is “without power” to entertain a 19 || second or successive petition unless petitioner first receives authorization from the Ninth Circuit. 29 || Chades v. Hill, 976 F.3d 1055, 1056-57 (9th Cir. 2020). 71 Petitioner has not obtained an order from the Ninth Circuit authorizing this court to 322 || consider his second or successive petition. The petition accordingly is DISMISSED without 23 || prejudice to refiling if petitioner obtains the necessary order. 24 The clerk is instructed to close the case. 25 IT ISSO ORDERED. 6 Dated: April 29, 2026 27 _A sO CHARLES R. BREYER 28 United States District Judge

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

Tshombe Kelley v. Iason Schultz, Warden, (N.D. Cal. 2026).

Tshombe Kelley v. Iason Schultz, Warden (Tshombe Kelley v. Iason Schultz, Warden) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Karen Chades v. Molly Hill
976 F.3d 1055 (Ninth Circuit, 2020)