King v. Schuyler

Summary

The document contains findings and recommendations in a federal habeas corpus action brought by Jesse Stephen King against Charles Schuyler. The magistrate judge recommends denying King's motion to amend because the proposed claims challenging his 1997 conviction were unauthorized successive claims, granting the respondent's motion to dismiss, and dismissing the parole-related claims as noncognizable state-law claims.

Holdings

1. A district court lacks jurisdiction to entertain claims challenging a prior state conviction when the petitioner has not obtained the authorization required for a second or successive § 2254 application.
2. Challenges to the application of state parole laws, the sufficiency of the evidence supporting a parole denial, and the state parole board’s ultimate decision do not state cognizable federal habeas claims absent a violation of the federal Constitution or other federal law.

Questions Presented

1. Whether petitioner could amend the pending § 2254 petition to add challenges to his 1997 murder conviction without authorization to file a second or successive habeas petition.
2. Whether petitioner’s challenges to his 2021 parole denial stated cognizable federal habeas claims when they primarily alleged violations of California law and challenged the sufficiency of the parole board’s decision.
3. Whether the second amended § 2254 petition should be dismissed for failure to state a cognizable federal claim for relief.

Disposition

other