Ornoski

(HC) (DP) Espinoza v. Ornoski

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 21, 20232:94-cv-01665California3,509 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ANTONIO ESPINOZA, No. 2:94-cv-1665 KJM DB Petitioner, v. ORDER WARDEN, San Quentin State Prison, Respondent. 16 Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding through counsel with a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. §2254. On August 25, 2023, this court held oral argument by Zoom videoconference on petitioner’s counsel’s Petition to Determine Incompetency and for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem. Assistant Federal Defender Lissa Gardner appeared for petitioner. Respondent’s counsel did not appear. After hearing the arguments of counsel, and good cause appearing, this court finds and orders as follows. //// //// ////

1 This court understands that respondent does not take a position on petitioner’s counsel’s motion. However, if respondent’s counsel does not intend to appear at a noticed hearing, they shall file a notice of non-appearance on the docket. RELEVANT…

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.