Neuschmid

(HC) Sisounthone v. Neuschmid

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 5, 20242:18-cv-03181California1,995 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 VANNA SISOUNTHONE, No. 2:18-cv-03181 DAD AC Petitioner, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ROBERT NEUSCHMID, Respondent. 16 Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this habeas corpus action filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254. This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. Currently pending is petitioner’s motion for abstention pursuant to Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971). ECF No. 32. Respondent has filed an opposition and the time for petitioner to file a reply has expired. For the reasons that follow, the undersigned recommends granting petitioner’s motion and dismissing his habeas petition without prejudice. I. Procedural History Petitioner filed the pending federal habeas petition raising four claims for relief on November 17, 2018. ECF No. 1. By order dated July 24, 2023, the court…

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.