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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


June 14, 2010

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

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

ORDER REGARDING MOTION

[Doc. #25]

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner voluntarily consented to exercise of Magistrate Judge jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1). On April 22, 2010, the undersigned issued an order dismissing the petition for failure to exhaust state remedies. Judgment was entered the same date. On June 7, 2010, Petitioner filed the instant motion entitled "Motion for Better Understanding." From the motion, it appears Petitioner seeks to return to state court to exhaust her state remedies. However, Petitioner believes a certificate of probable cause issued by this Court is required before she can proceed to the state courts. This is not the case, as this Court does not issue certificates of probable cause to proceed in state courts.

Petitioner is advised that she should seek relief directly with the state court in which she wishes to proceed by filing a petition according to the procedures of that court. Accordingly, Petitioner's motion is TERMINATED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20100614

© 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.