Warden

(HC) Love v. Warden

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 20, 20232:22-cv-01963California455 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DAEVON JAMELL LOVE, Case No. 2:22-cv-01963-KJM-JDP (HC) Petitioner, ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

v. WARDEN, Respondent. 16 Petitioner brought his petition for habeas relief on October 31, 2022. ECF No. 1. On January 12, 2023, I directed respondent to file a response to the petition within sixty days, ECF No. 6, and respondent filed an answer on March 13, 2023, ECF No. 11. Then, on July 14, 2023, petitioner filed a motion for default judgment wherein he asserted that he had, as of that date, not received any response to his petition. ECF No. 13. Respondent indicated that he had mailed a copy of the answer to petitioner on March 13, 2023. ECF No. 11 at 24. It appears that petitioner did not receive that mailing. Given that the answer was timely filed, I find no basis for default judgment and will recommend that the motion be denied. I will also direct respondent to re-serve the answer and any supporting documents on…

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.