Jasmine Benard Austion v. Alex Villaneuva

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaJanuary 15, 20212:20-cv-10898California1,028 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

BACKGROUND

18 Petitioner is currently in state custody awaiting trial on criminal charges of 19 domestic violence, rape, and resisting arrest. Petitioner previously filed a habeas 20 corpus petition in this Court, in which he sought to enjoin the state court criminal 21 proceedings on the basis of an alleged violation of his right to a speedy trial. Case 22 No. 2:20-cv-08741-ODW(AFM). On November 10, 2020, judgment was entered 23 dismissing that petition without prejudice based upon the Court’s determination that 24 abstention was required. 25 On November 30, 2020, Petitioner filed the present petition for a writ of habeas 26 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, in which he again challenges the pending 27 criminal trial. On December 7, 2020, the Court issued an order to show cause why 28 the petition should not be dismissed based upon abstention. (ECF No. 4.) In his response to the order, Petitioner asserts that he has exhausted his state remedies with respect to his claims. (ECF No. 5.) Thereafter, Petitioner filed a first amended petition challenging the pending state proceedings. The first amended petition alleges that Petitioner’s constitutional rights have …

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.