Gastelo

(HC) Orosco v. Gastelo

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 7, 20222:19-cv-02624California8,224 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ANTHONY NABOR OROSCO, No. 2:19-CV-2624-KJM-DMC-P Petitioner,

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

v. JOSIE GASTELO, Respondent. 16 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding with retained counsel, brings this petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Pending before the Court are Petitioner’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus, ECF No. 1, Respondent’s answer, ECF No. 13, and Petitioner’s amended traverse, ECF No. 16. Respondent has lodged the state court record, ECF No. 14. Because this action was filed after April 26, 1996, the provisions of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”) are presumptively applicable. See Lindh v. Murphy, 521 U.S. 320, 336 (1997); Calderon v. United States Dist. Ct. (Beeler), 128 F.3d 1283, 1287 (9th Cir. 1997), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1099 (1998). The AEDPA does not, however, apply in all circumstances. Where AEDPA is applicable, federal habeas relief under 28…

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.