UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
November 9, 2008
PF LAZOR, PETITIONER,
MIKE KNOWLES, WARDEN RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Oliver W. Wanger United States District Judge
ORDER DENYING PETITIONER'S MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT [Doc. 15]
On April 28, 2008, the Court adopted the Findings and Recommendation and dismissed the instant petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, for failure to state a cognizable claim, and judgment was entered.*fn1 (Court Docs. 7, 8.)
On May 22, 2008, Petitioner filed a motion to vacate the order dismissing the petition contending that his efforts to send a timely motion for an extension of time was thwarted by prison officials. (Court Doc. 11.) On July 8, 2008, the Court vacated the order dismissing the petition and judgment rendered, and granted Petitioner thirty days within which to file objections. (Court Doc. 13.) The thirty day time frame expired, and the Court again adopted the Findings and Recommendation and dismissed the petition. (Court Doc. 14.)
On October 27, 2008, Petitioner filed a second motion to vacate the judgment once again contending that prison officials have confiscated his legal property and he was unable to file timely objections. (Court Doc. 15.)
Petitioner's motion shall be denied. Because the instant petition for writ of habeas corpus was dismissed as procedurally deficient in that Petitioner's challenged the conditions of his confinement and not the fact or duration of that confinement, any objection by Petitioner is futile. Indeed, Petitioner provides no grounds upon which to object to the Court's ruling. It appears that Petitioner is simply attempting to stall the prompt judicial resolution of this case. Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner's motion to vacate the September 12, 2008, order dismissing the petition is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.