Rankins

Rankins v. Carey

Good Law
141 F. Supp. 2d 1231·2001 WL 469065·2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11096
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaMay 1, 2001EDCV 00-650 RT (E)California5,434 words

Opinion

Opinion

Timlin, J.

ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS.

The court, Judge Robert J. Timlin, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 has read and considered petitioner Randolph Rankins (“Petitioner”)’s petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (“ § 2254”) (“Petition”), respondent Tom Carey (“Respondent”)’s answer, and Petitioner’s traverse. The court has also read and considered the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (“R & R”), Respondent’s Objections to the R & R, and the Supplemental Report and Recommendation (“Supplemental R & R”). Based on such consideration, the court adopts the magistrate judge’s recommendation to grant a conditional writ of habeas corpus. However, the court does not agree entirely with the magistrate judge’s analysis and concludes as follows:

I.

BACKGROUND

Petitioner was tried and convicted of robbery in violation of Cal.Penal Code § 211 in RSC No. PEF-000564 of the Consolidated Municipal/Superior Courts of Riverside County, California (“state court”). During jury selection, the prosecutor used a peremptory challenge to strike Patsean Malbrough (“Malbrough”), an African-American prospective juror. Counsel for Petitioner raised a Batson…

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.