Tommy Cole v. Leanna Lundy

Summary

The United States District Court for the Central District of California summarily dismissed Tommy Cole’s successive petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging his 2013 state conviction. The court held that Cole had not obtained authorization from the Ninth Circuit as required under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b), and therefore lacked jurisdiction. The dismissal was without prejudice, pending motions were denied as moot, and a certificate of appealability was denied.

Holdings

1. A habeas petition that challenges the same state-court conviction previously challenged in a federal habeas petition dismissed on the merits is a second or successive petition subject to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b).
2. A petitioner may not bypass the authorization requirement merely by presenting new claims or a new legal argument when the petition attacks the same underlying judgment and the prior petition was dismissed on the merits.
3. Because Cole had not obtained Ninth Circuit authorization to file the successive petition, the district court lacked jurisdiction and dismissed the petition without prejudice.
4. A certificate of appealability was denied because the petition was patently successive and reasonable jurists could not debate the correctness of the procedural ruling.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the petition was a second or successive habeas petition because it challenged the same 2013 state-court conviction previously challenged in federal habeas proceedings.
2. Whether the assertion of a new claim or legal argument under California Penal Code § 745(a)(1) allowed Cole to avoid the authorization requirement for a second or successive petition.
3. Whether the petition should be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and whether a certificate of appealability should issue.

Disposition

dismissed