(HC) Burgess v. The People of the State of CA
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DWAYNE LAMONT BURGESS, No. 2:22-CV-0573-DAD-DMC-P Petitioner,
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
v. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA,
15 Respondent.
17 Petitioner, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil action, which has been entered on the Court’s docket as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Rule 4 of the Federal Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases provides for summary dismissal of a habeas petition “[i]f it plainly appears from the face of the petition and any exhibits annexed to it that the petitioner is not entitled to relief in the district court.” In the instant case, it is plain that Petitioner is not entitled to federal habeas relief. Petitioner initiated this action with a filing entitled “Libel of Review Answer of Dwayne Lamont Burgess, Motion for Relief From Judgement FRCP Rule 60(a)(b) In Re Libelants’ Fraudulent Conveyance of Real Property and Cestui Que Vie Trust of Dwayne Lamont 27 …