# (HC) Jaborie Brown v. Warden

> District Court, E.D. California · August 24, 2020

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10021442

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, E.D. California
- **Decided:** August 24, 2020
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10021442

## Opinion text

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10

11 JABORIE BROWN, ) Case No.: 1:20-cv-01156-JLT (HC)
)
12 Petitioner, ) ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO
) ASSIGN DISTRICT JUDGE
13 v. )
) FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO
14 WARDEN,
) DISMISS PETITION AS DUPLICATIVE AND
15 Respondent. ) SUCCESSIVE
)
16 ) [TEN-DAY OBJECTION PERIOD]

17
18 On August 18, 2020, Petitioner filed the instant habeas petition in this Court. (Doc. 1.)
19 Petitioner challenges his March 31, 2005 conviction. Petitioner is already proceeding with a petition
20 challenging this conviction in Brown v. Warden of U.S.P. Atwater, Case No. 1:20-cv-00233-SAB
21 (HC). In that action, the matter is awaiting a response from Respondent.
22 Review of the petitions filed in both actions reveals that the instant petition duplicates the prior
23 petition. A federal court must dismiss a second or successive petition that raises the same grounds as a
24 prior petition. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(1).
25 ORDER
26 Accordingly, the Court DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to assign a District Judge to the case.
27 RECOMMENDATION
28 The Court RECOMMENDS that the petition be dismissed as duplicative and successive.
1 This Findings and Recommendation is submitted to the United States District Court Judge
2 assigned to this case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Rule 304 of the
3 Local Rules of Practice for the United States District Court, Eastern District of California. Within ten
4 days after being served with a copy, Petitioner may file written objections with the Court. Such a
5 document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation.”
6 The Court will then review the Magistrate Judge’s ruling pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C).
7 Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to
8 appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
9
10 IT IS SO ORDERED.

11 Dated: August 24, 2020 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
12 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10021442. Public record. Not legal advice.