(HC) Kern v. Superior Court of CA, County of Sacramento
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JAMES CURTIS KERN, Case No. 2:24-cv-2432-JDP (P) Petitioner, v. ORDER SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO,
15 Respondent.
17 Petitioner, a state prisoner, brings this action under section 2254. ECF No. 1. The petition appears unexhausted, however. I will dismiss the current petition and give petitioner an opportunity to amend and to explain why this action should proceed. I will grant petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 7, and deny his motion vacate conviction or sentence, ECF No. 9. The petition is before me for preliminary review under Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. Under Rule 4, the judge assigned to the habeas proceeding must examine the habeas petition and order a response to the petition unless it “plainly appears” that the petitioner is not entitled to relief. See Valdez v. Montgomery, 918 F.3d 687, 693 (9th Cir. 2019); Boyd v. Thompson, 147 F.3d 1124, 1127 (9th…