Johnson v. Superior Court of California
- 3:22-cv-05613
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Johnson v. Superior Court, the court dismissed Johnson’s federal petition without prejudice for failing to finish state appeals and denied a certificate of appealability.
Darrell Eugene Johnson’s federal challenge to his 2022 San Mateo County conviction and sentence was dismissed without prejudice while his state appeal remained pending. The Superior Court of California was the named respondent.
What happened
In Johnson v. Superior Court of California, Darrell Eugene Johnson, a California prisoner representing himself, challenged his state conviction and sentence in a federal petition. His state appeal was still pending.
The court dismissed the petition without prejudice because Johnson had not first presented his claims through the available state courts. It granted him permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees and denied a certificate of appealability.
The court ruled that Johnson may file another federal petition after exhausting his state-court remedies. The judge’s name is not fully legible in the provided opinion text.
The detailed version
- Johnson v. Superior Court of California · No. 3:22-cv-05613
- May 25, 2023
Background
Darrell Eugene Johnson, a California state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his conviction and sentence. The opinion states that a San Mateo County jury convicted him on July 25, 2022, for possession of a knife. Johnson reported that his direct appeal was pending in the California appellate court, and the court independently confirmed that the appeal remained pending when it reviewed the petition.
Ruling
The court dismissed the federal habeas petition without prejudice for failure to exhaust state-court remedies. Exhaustion means giving the state courts, including the highest available state court, a fair opportunity to consider each claim before seeking federal habeas relief. Because Johnson’s direct appeal was still pending, the court concluded that he had not yet satisfied this requirement. The court stated that Johnson may file a federal petition challenging the conviction after he exhausts his state judicial remedies.
The court granted Johnson leave to proceed in forma pauperis, meaning he could proceed without prepaying the filing fee. It also denied a certificate of appealability because Johnson had not made the required substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied. The order did not decide whether Johnson’s underlying conviction or sentence violated federal law.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.