Hatton

(HC) Fort v. Hatton

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 29, 20192:18-cv-02603California6,697 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CECIL LAMAR FORT, No. 2:18-cv-2603-JAM-EFB P Petitioner, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SHAWN HATTON, Respondent. 16 Petitioner is a California state prisoner who, proceeding with counsel, brings an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He was convicted in the Solano County Superior Court of: (1) arson (Pen. Code § 451(b)); (2) possession of flammable material (§ 453(a)); (3) battery (§ 243(e)(1)); (4) vandalism (§ 594 (b)(2)(A)); and (5) battery on a police officer (§ 243(b)). The immediate habeas petition raises two claims. First, petitioner claims that the trial court violated his due process rights when it permitted expert testimony on fire accelerants from an individual who lacked the requisite expert qualifications. Second, petitioner argues that the state court erred in concluding that the prosecutor’s misconduct did not render his trial fundamentally unfair. For the…

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.