Singh

Singh v. Attorney General of the State of California

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJune 23, 20214:21-cv-03351California1,527 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

BACKGROUND

18 According to the petition, on December 16, 2016, Petitioner was sentenced to 30 years to 19 life, consecutive to three years, after being convicted by a Santa Clara County jury of rape and 20 other crimes. Dkt. No. 1 at 1. Petitioner unsuccessfully appealed his conviction to the state 21 appellate court, and the California Supreme Court denied his petition for review. Dkt. No. 1 at 2. 22 Petitioner does not report having filed any state habeas petition. Dkt. No. 1 at 3. 23 // 24 25 1 The Clerk of the Court is directed to substitute Warden David Holbrook in place of the previously named respondent because Warden Holbrook is Petitioner’s current custodian. See 26 Ortiz-Sandoval v. Gomez, 81 F.3d 891, 894 (9th Cir.), as amended (May 8, 1996) (rules governing relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 require person in custody pursuant to judgment of state court to 27 name state officer having custody of him as respondent); Stanley v. Cal. Sup. Ct., 21 F.3d 359, 360 DISCUSSION A. Standard of Review This court may entertain a petition for writ of habeas corpus “in behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a state…

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.