(HC) Murphy v. Attorney General of California

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 14, 20202:19-cv-02546California984 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JOSHUA MURPHY, No. 2:19-cv-02546 GGH P Petitioner, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF

CALIFORNIA,

15 Respondent. 16 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner has paid the filing fee. The matter was referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 626(b)(1) and Local Rule 302(c). Petitioner raises the following four grounds in his federal habeas petition: 1) factual innocence of California Pen. Code § 30600; 2) factual innocence of California Pen. Code § 311.11(a); 3) ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel; and 4) the “unlawful removal of [petitioner’s] daughter from home.” ECF No. 1 at 6-7. Upon review of the petition, the respondent will be directed to file a response to petitioner’s habeas petition as to Grounds one, two and three only. The undersigned will recommend…

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.