Delano J. Tolden v. Giselle Matteson

Background

Delano J. Tolden, a state prisoner, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his state conviction. He represented himself. The conviction followed a 2004 jury finding that he failed to register as a sex offender. He was sentenced to 25 years to life in state prison, along with financial penalties that the California Court of Appeal later reduced.

Tolden had previously filed a federal petition challenging the same conviction. The court denied that earlier petition, and the Ninth Circuit affirmed the denial. Tolden later filed the petition in this case. The respondent, Jason Schultz, the acting warden of the prison where Tolden was incarcerated, moved to dismiss it as a second or successive petition. Tolden did not file an opposition.

Court’s analysis

Under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b), a person who wants to file a second or successive federal petition challenging a state conviction generally must first obtain authorization from the federal appeals court. Without that authorization, the district court lacks jurisdiction—that is, legal authority—to consider the petition.

The court determined that Tolden’s petition was successive because he had previously challenged the same 2004 conviction in federal court. The court also concluded that Tolden had not obtained the required authorization from the Ninth Circuit. It therefore held that it had to dismiss the petition in its entirety without reaching the substance of Tolden’s challenge to his conviction.

Disposition

Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin granted the respondent’s motion to dismiss the petition as successive, and the petition was dismissed. The court also denied a certificate of appealability because Tolden had not shown that reasonable judges could debate whether the petition stated a valid claim that his constitutional rights were denied. The order closed the case and terminated the motion to dismiss. The opinion does not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.