(HC) Tweedy v. State of California ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SAMUEL W. TWEEDY, Case No. 2:23-cv-01239-JDP (HC) 12 Petitioner, ORDER 13 v. 14 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding without counsel, seeks a writ of habeas corpus 18 under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. After reviewing the petition, I find that it fails to state a cognizable 19 habeas claim. I will give him leave to amend. I will also grant his petition to proceed in forma 20 pauperis. ECF No. 2. Petitioner has recently filed a request for ruling, ECF No. 7, which I will 21 deny as moot. 22 The petition is before me for preliminary review under Rule 4 of the Rules Governing 23 Section 2254 Cases. Under Rule 4, the judge assigned to the habeas proceeding must examine 24 the habeas petition and order a response unless it “plainly appears” that the petitioner is not 25 entitled to relief. See Valdez v. Montgomery, 918 F.3d 687, 693 (9th Cir. 2019); Boyd v. 26 Thompson, 147 F.3d 1124, 1127 (9th Cir. 1998). 27 Petitioner argues that the state courts violated his rights by rejecting his petition for 28 resentencing relief under California Senate Bill 81. ECF No. 1 at 4. This claim, based entirely on 1 | state law, cannot justify federal habeas relief. Estelle v. McGuire, 502 U.S. 62, 67 (1991) 2 | (‘[Flederal habeas corpus relief does not lie for errors of state law.”) (quoting Lewis v. Jeffers, 3 | 497 U.S. 764, 780 (1990)). Even if this claim were recast as a due process violation it would still 4 | fail. See Langford v. Day, 110 F.3d 1380, 1381 (9th Cir. 1996). 5 Petitioner may file an amended petition that explains why he should still be allowed to 6 | proceed. 7 It is ORDERED that: 8 1. Petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 2, is GRANTED. 9 2. Petitioner’s request for ruling, ECF No. 7, is denied as moot. 10 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to send petitioner a federal § 2254 habeas form. 11 4. Within thirty days of this order’s entry, petitioner may file an amended habeas 12 | petition. If he does not, I will recommend this action be dismissed. 13 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 ( 1 ow — Dated: _ September 28, 2023 Q_——. 16 JEREMY D. PETERSON 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28