Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

SULLIVAN v. RUPF

United States District Court, N.D. California


March 18, 2004.

MICHAEL JOHN SULLIVAN, Petitioner,
v.
WARREN RUPF, Sheriff, Respondent

The opinion of the court was delivered by: MARTIN JENKINS, District Judge

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Michael John Sullivan filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in which he claimed that he was being subjected to criminal prosecution in state court in violation of his rights under the Supremacy Clause and the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. At the time he filed his petition, Sullivan was awaiting trial in the Contra Costa County Superior Court on six counts of robbery, Cal. Penal Code § 211, based on his alleged robbery of six banks or financial institutions. Sullivan has since been convicted, but apparently has not yet been sentenced.

The contentions in this petition are identical to contentions petitioner made in a prior petition in this Court, Sullivan v. Rupf, No. C 99-1526 MJJ (PR). In that case, the Court granted respondent's motion to dismiss that action on the grounds that the Page 2 Court should abstain under Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971), because petitioner had not yet been sentenced. In the instant case, petitioner indicates that he still has not been sentenced for the convictions he purports to challenge. As petitioner's circumstances have not materially changed since the dismissal of his prior petition, the instant petition must be dismissed for the reasons explained in the March 8, 2000 Order dismissing the prior petition.

  Accordingly, the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED.

  The clerk shall close the file and terminate all pending motions.

  IT IS SO ORDERED.

  JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE

  () Jury Verdict. This action came before the Court for a trial by jury. The issues have been tried and the jury has rendered its verdict.'

  (X) Decision by Court. This action came to trial or hearing before the Court. The issues have been tried or heard and a decision has been rendered.

  IT IS SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED

  Pursuant to the order filed March 19, 2004, this case is dismissed.

20040318

© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.