(HC) Valera v. The People of the State of California, CDCR ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOEL VALERA, Case No. 1:22-cv-01522-HBK (HC) 12 Petitioner, ORDER CONSTRUING PETITION AS MOTION TO AMEND OR AMENDED 13 v. PETITION IN CASE NO. 1:22-cv-00852- ADA-CDB 14 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CDCR, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO 15 RE-FILE INSTANT PETITION AS MOTION Respondents. TO AMEND OR AMENDED PETITION IN 16 CASE NO. 1:22-cv-00852-ADA-CDB 17 ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE THIS CASE 18 19 Petitioner Joel Valera, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed this instant petition for writ 20 of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on November 23, 2022. (Doc. No. 1). The Court takes 21 judicial notice of its own files which reveal that Petitioner has a previously filed federal petition 22 in this Court challenging the same conviction at case number 1:22-cv-00852-ADA-CDB. The 23 Court construes the filing as a motion to amend the petition filed in Petitioner’s earlier case and 24 orders this matter closed. 25 In Woods v. Carey, the Ninth Circuit held that, under certain circumstances, if a pro se 26 petitioner files a habeas petition during the pendency of a previous petition, the district court 27 should construe the second petition as a motion to amend the previous petition. 525 F.3d 886, 28 1 | 889-90 (9th Cir. 2008). Hence, Woods appears to require a district court to construe a “second or 2 || successive” petition filed while an earlier petition is still pending in the district court as a motion 3 | to amend the earlier petition. Because Petitioner has a pending federal habeas petition in case 4 | number 1:22-cv-00852-ADA-CDB, which challenges the same conviction as in this case, the 5 | Court must construe this Petition as a motion to amend the earlier-filed petition. See id. at 889- 6 | 90. Further, a review of the docket in case number 1:22-cv-00852-ADA-CDB reveals that, on 7 | November 2, 2022, the Court directed Petitioner to file an amended petition in his earlier case and 8 | afforded Petitioner thirty (30) days to file his amended petition. See Case No. 1:22-cv-00852- 9 | ADA-CDB, Order dated November 2, 2022 (Doc. No. 9). Thus, Petitioner may have intended the 10 | instant petition filed in this action to be his amended petition in his previously filed action. 11 Accordingly, it is ORDERED: 12 1. The Court construes the Petition (Doc. No. 1) as a motion to amend the petition or as 13 an amended petition in case number 1:22-cv-00852-ADA-CDB. 14 2. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to contact United States Magistrate Judge Baker’s 15 chambers and docket the petition in this case as either a motion to amend or as an 16 amended petition in case number 1:22-cv-00852-ADA-CDB as directed by chambers. 17 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 18 | Dated: _ December 8, 2022 Mihaw. fares Zackte 20 HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28