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.

Smith v. Merced County

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


May 5, 2010

ANTONIOA SMITH, PETITIONER,
v.
MERCED COUNTY, RESPONDENT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gary S. Austin United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER DENYING MISCELLANEOUS MOTION

[Doc. #23]

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 22, 2010, the undersigned issued an order dismissing the petition and directing the Clerk of Court to enter judgment and close the case. Judgment was entered that same date and the case was closed. Also on that same date, Petitioner filed a pleading entitled "Motion for Notice of New Address & 995 motion." It is not entirely clear what Petitioner intended with this motion, but it appears to request that the Court review her claims. As the Court has previously found, however, the instant petition is unexhausted. It has since been dismissed and the case is now closed. Petitioner is advised to seek relief first in the California Supreme Court before presenting her claims here.

Accordingly, Petitioner's motion is DENIED. 24 25 IT IS SO ORDERED.

20100505

© 1992-2010 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.