Warden

Kenneth Wilson Barnette v. Warden

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 1, 20252:23-cv-02632California285 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KENNETH WILSON BARNETTE, No. 2:23-cv-2632 TLN AC P Petitioner, v. ORDER WARDEN, Respondent. 16 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed a motion to correct his sentence under Penal Code § 654 and request for remand to the trial court. ECF No. 14. The motion seeks relief under state law authority and will therefore be denied without prejudice to petitioner pursuing his claims in state court. See Middleton v. Cupp, 768 F.2d 1083, 1085 (9th Cir. 1985) (habeas relief not available for state law errors of any kind). To the extent petitioner makes conclusory allegations of that his rights to due process and ineffective assistance of counsel were also violated (ECF No. 14), he has already raised these claims in the petition (ECF No. 7 at 7, 23-26).1 ////

Respondent has moved to dismiss the petition as unexhausted (ECF No. 17) and petitioner has moved for a stay (ECF Nos. 20, 26). …

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.