Miranda

Miranda v. Carey

Good Law
746 F. Supp. 2d 1150·2010 WL 4010374·2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108939
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 13, 20102:06-cv-00333California4,302 words

Opinion

Opinion

England, J.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Robert Louis Miranda (“Petitioner”) is incarcerated for second-degree murder. Proceeding in pro se, he now seeks a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . That Writ challenges Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s reversal of the 2005 decision by the California Board of Prison Terms (“Board”) granting Petitioner parole. Petitioner alleges that the Governor’s reversal of the Board’s decision violated his right to due process. Specifically, he claims that the Governor’s reversal of the Board’s suitability findings were based on frozen factors/elements and were made without “some evidence” in the record to support his decision.

In the underlying state court proceedings, the San Francisco County Superior Court denied the Petitioner’s Writ finding that “some evidence” existed to support the Governor’s 2005 reversal. That decision was upheld by the Third Appellate District. Petitioner subsequently filed a habeas petition with the California Supreme Court but the petition was rejected as untimely filed.

After Petitioner filed the instant petition with this Court, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendations granting Petitioner’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.