Diaz

(HC) Peterson v. Diaz

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 27, 20202:19-cv-01480California299 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 RICHARD ANTHONY PETERSON, No. 2:19-cv-01480 WBS GGH P Petitioner, v. ORDER RALPH DIAZ, Respondent.

On March 25, 2020, petitioner filed a motion for immediate release based solely on the existence of the present COVID-19 medical crisis in light of his possibly immune compromised system, and the prospect of release in mid-April 2020.1 ECF No. 26. Respondent shall file a response to this motion no later than 4:00 p.m., Wednesday, April 1, 2020. The undersigned recognizes that this is a short response time in the present conditions, but nevertheless, the purpose of the motion may be mooted unless resolved expeditiously. No extensions of time will be granted. The undersigned is interested in whether such a motion is appropriate in habeas corpus at the district court level prior to any ruling on the merits, and absent the traditional focus on the merits of the claims. See e.g., Hall v. San Francisco Superior Court,…

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.