Legal Opinion

(HC) Stephen v. Matteson

District Court, E.D. California

Decided October 28, 2020No. 2:20-cv-01003Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JIMMIE STEPHEN, No. 2:20-cv-1003 KJM KJN P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER and FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 WARDEN G. MATTESON, 15 Respondent. 16 17 I. Introduction 18 Petitioner is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel. Respondent moves to dismiss 19 the petition on the grounds that petitioner’s challenge to the 2019 denial of parole fails to state a 20 cognizable federal habeas claim.1 Petitioner filed an opposition, and respondent filed a reply. As 21 set forth below, the undersigned recommends…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Gilbert B. Martinez v. Eddie Ylst, Superintendent, California Medical Facility SouthCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
  2. Ewing v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
  3. Hutto v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  4. Robert J. Jarvis v. Louis S. Nelson, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1971
  5. United States v. Juan Pimienta-Redondo, United States of America v. Alfredo PupoCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1989

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API