Warden

(HC) Butler v. Warden

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 21, 20202:19-cv-02309California1,452 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ROBERT G. BUTLER, No. 2:19-cv-2309 JAM KJN P Petitioner, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS WARDEN, Respondent. 16 Petitioner is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se, with an application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, in which he challenges a prison disciplinary imposed in 2016. On January 27, 2020, respondent filed a motion to dismiss this action on the grounds that habeas jurisdiction is lacking, and it was filed beyond the one-year statute of limitations. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). Petitioner did not file an opposition to the motion. On March 5, 2020, petitioner was ordered to show cause why his failure to oppose the motion should not be deemed a waiver of any opposition to the granting of the motion. Petitioner did not respond and has not filed an opposition to the motion. The undersigned recommends that respondent’s motion be granted. Governing Standards Rule 4 of the Rules…

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.