Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Cannon v. United States

June 23, 2010

TYRRALL FARROW CANNON, PETITIONER,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RESPONDENT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: R. Gary Klausner United States District Judge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DISMISSING SUCCESSIVE PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

On June 16, 2010, Petitioner Tyrrall Farrow Cannon ("Petitioner"), a prisoner in state custody proceeding pro se, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 ("Petition"), in which he challenges his 2003 state court conviction and sentence in San Bernardino County Superior Court Case No. 026177. Petitioner has filed numerous petitions in this Court challenging this 2003 conviction and sentence. For the reasons set forth below, the Petition must be dismissed as an unauthorized successive habeas petition.

PROCEEDINGS

On March 19, 2003, in Case No. FWV 026177, a San Bernardino County jury convicted Petitioner of inflicting corporal injury on a spouse and assault. The court found true that Petitioner had two prior "strike" convictions within the meaning of California's "Three Strikes Law. The Court sentenced Petitioner to a term of 25 years to life in prison. (Petition at 2; Report and Recommendation in Case No. EDCV 04-1287-CJC (CT), filed June 15, 2006 ("June 2006 R&R") at 2-3.)

Petitioner appealed his conviction, which was affirmed by the California Court of Appeal on June 16, 2004. (Petition at 5; June 2006 R&R at 3.)

Petitioner filed a petition for review in the California Supreme Court, which was denied on August 25, 2004. (Petition at 5; June 2006 R&R at 3.)

On August 18, 2003, July 21, 2004, and October 7, 2004, Petitioner filed three separate habeas petition in the California Supreme Court, which were denied on May 12, 2004, June 8, 2005, and September 7, 2005, respectively. (June 2006 R&R at 3-4.)

On October 12, 2004, in Case No. EDCV 04-1287-CJC (CT), Petitioner filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, attacking the judgment in San Bernardino County Superior Court Case No. FWV 026177 ("2004 Federal Petition").*fn1

On June 15, 2006, the Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation recommending that the 2004 Federal Petition be denied on the merits and dismissed with prejudice. On July 7, 2006, the District Judge issued an Order adopting the Report and Recommendation and entered a Judgment denying the 2004 Federal Petition and dismissing it with prejudice.

On June 16, 2010, Petitioner filed the instant Petition, which also attacks the judgment in San Bernardino County Superior Court Case No. FWV 026177.

DISCUSSION

I. Duty to Screen

This Court has a duty to screen habeas corpus petitions. See Rules Governing ยง 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts, Rule 4 Advisory Committee Notes. Rule 4 requires a district court to examine a habeas corpus petition, and if it plainly appears from the face of the petition and any annexed exhibits that the petitioner is not entitled to relief, the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.