Fonseca

Fonseca v. Hall

Good Law

486 F. Supp. 2d 1119·2007 WL 1430344·2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40156

United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaMay 7, 2007CV 04 5836 CJC RCCalifornia3,425 words

Opinion

Chapman, J.

PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER DENYING RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED PETITION

On March 8, 2006, respondent filed a motion to dismiss the First Amended Petition, arguing it is a “mixed” petition containing grounds that have been exhausted and grounds that have not been exhausted and the petition is untimely, and on May 9, 2006, respondent filed a supplemental brief addressing equitable tolling and exhaustion. On March 27, 2006, petitioner filed his opposition to the motion to dismiss. The Court appointed counsel for petitioner to address respondent’s motion to dismiss, and on January 22, 2007, petitioner, represented by counsel, filed a supplemental opposition to respondent’s motion to dismiss.

BACKGROUND

I

On April 25, 2000, in Los Angeles County Superior Court case no. KA044980, a jury convicted petitioner Francisco Fonse-ca of one count of conspiracy to commit kidnapping for ransom in violation of California Penal Code (“P.C.”) § 182(a)(1) (count 1) and three counts of kidnapping for ransom in violation of P.C. § 209(a) (counts 2-4), and, as to all counts, the jury found a principal was armed with a handgun within the meaning of P.C. § 12022(a)(1). Motion to…

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.