History
  • No items yet
midpage
Xavier Fort v. Warden
2:19-cv-04303
C.D. Cal.
Jun 6, 2019
Check Treatment
Docket
Case Information

*1 6/6/2019 U N I TE D STATE S D I STR I CT CO U R T CE N TR AL D I STR I CT OF CALI F O R N I A XAVIER FORT, CASE NO. 2:19-cv-04303- J VS (SK) Petitioner, OR D E R D I SM I SSI N G ACTI ON F OR LACK OF J U R I SD I CTI ON v. WARDEN,

Respondent.

Petitioner is a California state prisoner serving a life sentence without possibility of parole for m urder and robbery. On May 17, 2019, he filed a m otion for a 60-day extension of tim e to file a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, which caused the Clerk’s Office to open this action, but no habeas petition has yet been filed. (ECF 1). The Court thus lacks jurisdiction in this case because there is no “case or controversy” to decide. Ca lder on v. Ashm us, 523 U.S. 740, 746 (1998); see Ca sa bur i v. Wa r den, 2013 WL 3367275, at *1 (C.D. Cal. J uly 3, 2013) (dism issing for lack of jurisdiction letter request for extension of tim e to file habeas petition where no petition had yet been filed). THEREFORE, this action is DISMISSED *2 without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. J udgm ent dism issing this action without prejudice will be entered accordingly. [1]

I T I S SO OR D E R E D .

DATED: J une 06, 2019

HON. J AMES V. SELNA U.S. DISTRICT J UDGE PRESENTED BY:

STEVE KIM

U.S. MAGISTRATE J UDGE

[1] While the Court does not decide this issue, it is likely that Petitioner still ha s tim e to file a tim ely federal habeas petition. See Tr iguer os v. Ada m s, 658 F.3d 983, 987 (9th Cir. 2011) (Court m ay take judicial notice of public state court dockets). The California Suprem e Court apparently denied Petitioner’s direct appeal on J une 29, 2018. (No. S248469). If that is right, and Petitioner pursued no writ of certiorari in the U.S. Suprem e Court (as he adm its), his conviction would have becom e final 90 days after the California Suprem e Court’s denial. See 28 U.S.C. § 2101; Bowen v. Roe, 188 F.3d 1157, 1158- 59 (9th Cir. 1999). From that date, Petitioner would have one year—not including any statutory or gap tolling for properly filed state habeas petitions—to file a federal habeas petition on tim e. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)(A). 2

Case Details

Case Name: Xavier Fort v. Warden
Court Name: District Court, C.D. California
Date Published: Jun 6, 2019
Docket Number: 2:19-cv-04303
Court Abbreviation: C.D. Cal.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.