Franklin

Franklin v. Fox

Good Law
107 F. Supp. 2d 1154·2000 WL 1006448·2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10100
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJuly 17, 2000C 97-2443 CRBCalifornia5,789 words

Opinion

Opinion

Breyer, J.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Now before the Court are (1) the motion for summary judgment of defendants Robert Morse and Bryan Cassandro, (2) the motion for summary judgment of defendants Martin Murray and John Cuneo, (3) the motion for summary judgment of plaintiff Eileen Franklin-Lipsker, and (4) plaintiffs cross-motion for summary judgment with respect to the Murray/Cuneo motion. After carefully considering the papers filed by the parties, including their evidentiary objections, and having had the benefit of oral argument, defendants’ motions for summary judgment are GRANTED and plaintiffs cross-motion for summary judgment is DENIED.

BACKGROUND

This action arises from the 1990 conviction of plaintiff for first-degree murder after a jury trial in San Mateo County. Plaintiff was convicted of the 20-year-old murder of his daughter’s friend, Susan Nason, based, in part, on his daughter’s recovered memory. In 1995, this Court (Honorable D. Lowell Jensen), granted plaintiffs petition for habeas corpus on the ground that there were several constitutional errors at trial and that the errors were not harmless. Franklin v. Duncan, 884 F.Supp. 1435 (N.D.Cal.), aff'd, 70 F.3d 75 (9th Cir.1995).…

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.