UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
September 25, 2009
TRINIDAD HERNANDEZ, PETITIONER,
J. HARTLEY, WARDEN, RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Oliver W. Wanger United States District Judge
ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AS MOOT
[Docs. 13 & 15]
Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
On April 6, 2009, Petitioner filed the instant federal petition for writ of habeas corpus in this Court. Petitioner claims that the Governor's July 21, 2008 decision finding him unsuitable for parole violated his federal constitutional rights.
On September 3, 2009, Respondent filed a notice that Petitioner was released on parole, and on September 23, 2009, Respondent submitted Petitioner's parole status sheet indicating that he was released on parole on August 25, 2009 to the South Central Parole Unit in Los Angeles, California. Because Petitioner has been granted the relief he requested, the case is now moot. The case or controversy requirement of Article III of the Federal Constitution deprives the Court of jurisdiction to hear moot cases. Iron Arrow Honor Soc'y v. Heckler, 464 U.S. 67, 70 104 S.Ct. 373, 374-75 (1983); NAACP., Western Region v. City of Richmond, 743 F.2d 1346, 1352 (9th Cir. 1984). A case becomes moot if the "the issues presented are no longer 'live' or the parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome." Murphy v. Hunt, 455 U.S. 478, 481 (1984). The Federal Court is "without power to decide questions that cannot affect the rights of the litigants before them." North Carolina v. Rice, 404 U.S. 244, 246 (1971) per curiam, quoting Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Hayworth, 300 U.S. 227, 240-241, (1937).
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DISMISSED as moot; and,
2. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.