King

(HC) Pritchett v. King

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 13, 20201:12-cv-01333California642 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JESSE PRITCHETT, No. 1:12-cv-1333-SKO (HC) 12 Petitioner, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT

TO ASSIGN DISTRICT JUDGE

13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 14 TO GRANT PETITIONER’S MOTION TO

REOPEN THE CASE

15 AUDREY KING, Executive Director, [Doc. 24] 16 Respondent.

17

18 Petitioner is committed pursuant to the Sexual Violent Predator Act (“SVPA”) and is 19 proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. On 20 November 1, 2013, the District Court abstained from the exercise of jurisdiction pursuant to 21 Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 40-45 (1971), and dismissed the petition without prejudice. (Doc. 22 22.) Judgment was entered the same date, and the case was closed. (Doc. 23.) 23 On October 15, 2020, Petitioner filed the instant motion to reopen the case. (Doc. 24.) 24 Petitioner states that state proceedings have concluded. He notes that the California Court of 25 Appeal affirmed judgment of…

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.