Baughman

(HC) Hill v. Baughman

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 7, 20202:19-cv-01415California1,302 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KENNETH HILL, No. 2:19-cv-1415 MCE CKD P Petitioner, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS DAVID BAUGHMAN, Respondent. 16 Petitioner is a California prisoner proceeding pro se with an application for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He challenges prisoner disciplinary proceedings occurring April 22, 2015. The result of the proceedings included a finding that petitioner had violated prison rules by fighting and a 90-day loss of sentence credit. ECF No. 11 at 21-27. Respondent argues that the petition is not timely. Title 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1) provides: A 1–year period of limitation shall apply to an application for a writ of habeas corpus by a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court. The limitation period shall run from the latest of— (A) the date on which the judgment became final by the conclusion of direct review or the expiration of the time for…

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.