Unknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 TIO DINERO SESSOMS, No. 2:22-cv-0420 AC P Petitioner, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS &

RECOMMENDATIONS

UNKNOWN, Respondent. 16 By order filed March 9, 2022, petitioner was ordered to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because it appeared from the allegations in the petition that he was no longer in custody at the time the petition was filed. ECF No. 3. Petitioner has now filed a response in which he states that any delays were due to not receiving his court transcripts in a timely fashion and the pandemic. ECF No. 5 at 1-3. He states that if not for the pandemic and delays in receiving his transcripts, “this habeas corpus would’ve been filed two years ago while I was still on parole with no less than a year left ‘in custody.’” Id. at 2. Petitioner also asserts that he was on parole when he filed his state habeas petition but that his parole had terminated by the time the state court…