Rao

Rao v. LaRose

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaDecember 2, 20243:24-cv-01716California1,086 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 VINOD RAO, Case No.: 24cv1716 RSH (MSB)

Petitioner,

ORDER DISMISSING AMENDED

v. PETITION WITHOUT PREJUDICE

CHRISTOPHER J. LAROSE, Warden, et al., 15 Respondents.

17 On September 23, 2024—Petitioner, who was at that time a detainee in the custody of the Department of Homeland Security, Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, proceeding pro se—filed a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging a San Diego Superior Court judgment of conviction and resulting sentence to two years of probation. ECF No. 1. On October 2, 2024, the Court dismissed the case without prejudice for failure to satisfy the filing fee requirement, because Petitioner was not in actual custody pursuant to a state court judgment at the time of his filing, and for failure to name a proper respondent. ECF No. 4. The Court noted that given Petitioner was in the custody of federal immigration…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.