You're viewing Docket Item 76 from the case Piazza v. Ortiz. View the full docket and case details.

Download this document:





t
r
u
o
C


a
i
n
r
o
f
i
l
a
C




t
c
i
r
t
s
i
D

s
e
t
a
t
S
d
e
t
i
n
U


f
o

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
D
n
r
e
h
t
r
o
N

e
h
t

r
o
F



1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28


Case5:01-cv-20326-JF Document76 Filed09/19/13 Page1 of 2
















**E-Filed 9/19/2013**











IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION


ANDREW PIAZZA,

Petitioner,

v.

GEORGE A. ORTIZ, Warden,

Respondent.

Case No. C 01-20326 JF (PR)

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR APPEAL

[re: Docket No. 75]









On August 6, 2012, Petitioner, a California prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a motion to




reopen and amend his petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, which
the Court denied on August 17, 2012. (See Docket No. 74).

amend habeas corpus petition.” (Docket No. 75). Petitioner’s argument that his petition should
“relate back” does not change the fact that he is challenging the same conviction based on new
claims, which requires that he must first obtain an order from the United States Court of Appeals for
the Ninth Circuit authorizing this Court to consider the petition. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A).
Petitioner has not shown that he has obtained such authorization.

Petitioner has filed a “motion for appeal of the Court’s order denying motion to reopen and

Case No. C 01-20326 JF (PR)
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR APPEAL



t
r
u
o
C


a
i
n
r
o
f
i
l
a
C




t
c
i
r
t
s
i
D

s
e
t
a
t
S
d
e
t
i
n
U


f
o

t
c
i
r
t
s
i
D
n
r
e
h
t
r
o
N

e
h
t

r
o
F



1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28


Case5:01-cv-20326-JF Document76 Filed09/19/13 Page2 of 2




Accordingly, the motion to appeal is DENIED. Petitioner may file a second or successive
petition challenging the same conviction if and when he obtains the necessary order from the Ninth
Circuit.




DATED: September 19, 2013





__________________________________
JEREMY FOGEL
United States District Judge

This order terminates Docket No. 75.
IT IS SO ORDERED.


















Case No. C 01-20326 JF (PR)
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR APPEAL

2