Duran

Duran v. Castro

Good Law
2002 Daily Journal DAR 12829·227 F. Supp. 2d 1121·2002 WL 31355478·2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20157
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 18, 2002CIV. S-00-305-LKKJFMCalifornia7,720 words

Opinion

Opinion

Karlton, J.

ORDER

Petitioner, a state prisoner, brings an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72-302, his application was referred to the magistrate judge who recommended that the application be denied. Petitioner, through counsel, has objected to the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendation. I consider petitioner’s objections on the pleadings and papers filed herein and without oral argument. See Local Rule 78-230(h).

I.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On January 4, 1997, J.C. Penney store security officers detained petitioner, Richard Duran, for attempting to shoplift a belt and a pair of socks worth a total of $26.99. A long-time heroin addict, Duran was found to have 1.55 grams of heroin and a syringe in his possession. Duran was charged with simple possession of heroin and petty theft with a prior.

Duran pled guilty to possession of 1.55 grams of heroin in exchange for the dismissal of the petty theft charge and a recommendation that he serve no more than twenty-five years to life in prison. Under the terms of the agreement, Duran admitted that he had suffered two prior serious felonies —…

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.