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.

Anne Lorraine Sabetta, et al v. Scott Jones

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


April 25, 2012

ANNE LORRAINE SABETTA, ET AL.,
PETITIONER,
v.
SCOTT JONES, RESPONDENT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Craig M. Kellison United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

Petitioner brought a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, prior to her state conviction while she was being held as a pre-trial detainee. As such, her petition was dismissed as filed prematurely, and without showing special circumstances warranting federal intervention prior to her trial or exhausting her state remedies. In addition, petitioner failed to keep the court informed of her current address as required by Local Rule 183, providing another basis on which this court dismissed this action. Final judgment was entered in this case on January 30, 2012.

Petitioner is now requesting the reinstatement of her petition. While it appears petitioner is attempting to show she has now been convicted of the charges against her, and has appealed that conviction, it also still appears she has not completed her appeal nor has she exhausted her state remedies by providing the highest state court with a full and fair opportunity to consider all claims before presenting them to the federal court. See Picard v. Connor, 404 U.S. 270, 276 (1971), Middleton v. Cupp, 768 F.2d 1083, 1086 (9th Cir. 1986).

This case is closed, and there is no basis on which to grant petitioner's request to reinstate her petition. Her petition was dismissed without prejudice, however, so once petitioner exhausts her state court remedies, she may be in a position to file a new federal habeas petition. She may not, however, simply file a new petition in this closed case. This case is closed, and judgment has been entered. This case will not be reopened. Petitioner is advised that any other documents filed in this case will be disregarded and no order will issue in response thereto. If petitioner wishes to challenge her conviction, she will be required to initiate a new proceeding.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20120425

© 1992-2012 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.