(HC) Mills v. State Of California, No. 2:2005cv01804 - Document 3 (E.D. Cal. 2005)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Judge Craig M. Kellison recommending that this action be dismissed w/o prejudice. 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Kenneth Mills referred to Judge Lawrence K. Karlton. (Waggoner, D)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(HC) Mills v. State Of California Doc. 3 Case 2:05-cv-01804-LKK-CMK Document 3 Filed 09/15/2005 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KENNETH MILLS, Petitioner, 11 12 No. CIV S-05-1804 LKK CMK P vs. 13 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 14 Respondent. / 15 Petitioner, a pre-trial detainee proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a 16 17 FINDINGS AND RECOMENDATIONS writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.1 Petitioner’s petition was filed with the court on September 8, 2005. The court’s 18 19 own records reveal that petitioner has several cases pending in this district.2 Civil Case 05-1735 20 DFL CMK, which was filed on August 26, 2005, contains allegations concerning mental health 21 The court notes that petitioner has not filed an in forma pauperis affidavit or paid the required filing fee ($5.00) for this action. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a); 1915(a). Should petitioner file subsequent actions without filing an in forma pauperis affidavit, he will be responsible for the filing fee. 1 22 23 24 25 26 A court may take judicial notice of court records. See MGIC Indem. Co. v. Weisman, 803 F.2d 500, 505 (9th Cir. 1986); United States v. Wilson, 631 F.2d 118, 119 (9th Cir. 1980). Petitioner’s other cases include:CIV S-04-1649 DFL CMK P; CIV S-05-0947 MCE PAN P; CIV S-05-1153 LKK PAN P; and CIV S-05-1154 FCD KJM P; CIV S-05-1291 GEB KJM P; CIV S-051735 DFL CMK 2 1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:05-cv-01804-LKK-CMK Document 3 Filed 09/15/2005 Page 2 of 2 1 evaluations which are almost identical to the allegations against respondents in the September 8, 2 2005 complaint. Due to the duplicative nature of the present action, the court finds it frivolous 3 and, therefore, will dismiss the petition. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). 4 Petitioner is cautioned that he should refrain from filing duplicative complaints 5 with this court. If he desires to add something to complaints he has already filed, he must seek 6 to amend that complaint; not file a new one. IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 7 8 prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). These findings and recommendations are submitted to the District Judge assigned 9 10 to this case pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty days after being 11 served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written objections with the 12 court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and 13 Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time 14 may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th 15 Cir. 1991). 16 DATED: September 13, 2005. 17 18 19 ______________________________________ CRAIG M. KELLISON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
