Neuschmid

Vanna Sisounthone v. Robert Neuschmid

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 10, 20252:18-cv-03181California891 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 VANNA SISOUNTHONE, No. 2:18-cv-03181-DAD-AC (HC) 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS AND DENYING

14 ROBERT NEUSCHMID, PETITION SEEKING FEDERAL HABEAS

RELIEF ON THE MERITS

15 Respondent. (Doc. Nos. 1, 45) 16

17 18 Petitioner Vanna Sisounthone is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis 19 with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to 20 a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 On June 30, 2025, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations 22 recommending that petitioner’s federal habeas petition, proceeding on a single claim of 23 constitutional error at trial, be denied on the merits. (Doc. No. 45.) In those findings and 24 recommendations, the magistrate judge carefully examined petitioner’s sole remaining claim for 25 federal habeas relief—that the prosecutor’s…

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.