Richard Devonn Webb v. Leanna Lundy

Summary

The United States District Court for the Central District of California ordered a state prisoner to show cause why his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition should not be dismissed without prejudice. The court determined that the petition appeared to be a second or successive challenge to the same state-court judgment previously addressed on the merits, and that the petitioner had not obtained authorization from the Ninth Circuit to file it. The petitioner was given until September 30, 2025, to respond or request voluntary dismissal.

Holdings

1. A petitioner must obtain authorization from the appropriate court of appeals before filing a second or successive habeas application in the district court; failure to obtain that authorization is a jurisdictional bar.
2. A newly discovered-facts claim may qualify for the statutory exception only if it satisfies the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(2), but the petitioner must still obtain authorization from the court of appeals before filing in district court.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the present § 2254 petition appears to be a second or successive habeas petition challenging the same state-court judgment.
2. Whether the district court has jurisdiction to consider a second or successive habeas petition filed without prior authorization from the court of appeals.
3. Whether petitioner should be required to show cause why the action should not be dismissed without prejudice.

Disposition

other