Santoro

Ronald Young v. Kelly Santoro

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 13, 20252:25-cv-02965California632 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 RONALD YOUNG, No. 2:25-cv-2965 DAD CSK P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 KELLY SANTORO, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner is a state prisoner, proceeding through counsel with a petition for writ of habeas 18 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On September 22, 2025, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals 19 transferred petitioner’s petition to this court. (ECF No. 1.) On October 17, 2025, this Court 20 ordered petitioner to either pay the filing fee or file an in forma pauperis application. (ECF No. 21 4.) Because petitioner’s counsel was appointed by the Ninth Circuit, the October 17, 2025 order 22 was issued in error. Accordingly, the October 17, 2025 order is vacated. 23 On November 6, 2025, petitioner’s counsel, Karyn H. Bucur, filed a motion for 24 substitution of appointed counsel. (ECF No. 7.) Ms. Bucar requests that attorney Benjamin 25 Ramos be substituted as petitioner’s appointed counsel. (Id.) Good cause appearing, this Court 26 orders…

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.