UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 10, 2013
CHRISTOPHER L. HARRIS,
HECTOR A. RIOS, JR., RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lawrence J. O'Neill United States District Judge
ORDER DENYING PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT [ECF No. 33]
On September 11, 2012, the instant petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 was dismissed and judgment was entered. In that order, the Court also declined to issue a certificate of appealability.
On September 20, 2012, Petitioner filed a notice of appeal. On December 19, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied Petitioner's request for a certificate of appealability.
After filing a notice of appeal, but prior to the Ninth Circuit's ruling, Petitioner filed a motion for relief from judgment in this Court on September 24, 2012.
Petitioner seeks relief pursuant to Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Petitioner cites to subsections (3), (5), and (6) of Rule 60(b), which states:
On a motion and just terms, the court may relieve a party or its legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons:
(3) fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party;
(5) the judgment has been satisfied, released or discharged; it is based on an earlier judgment that has been reversed or vacated; or applying it prospectively is no longer equitable; or
(6) any other reason that justifies relief.
In his motion, Petitioner does nothing more than attempt to reargue the allegations presented in his petition which has been dismissed. Accordingly, Petitioner has failed to set forth any basis for relief from the judgment and his motion must be DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.