Mendoza

Mendoza v. Pollard

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaJune 24, 20213:20-cv-00847California5,812 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 ROBERT A. MENDOZA, Case No.: 20cv0847-GPC(RBB)

Petitioner,

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND

v. RECOMMENDATION GRANTING

MOTION TO DISMISS PETITION

M. POLLARD, Warden,

AND DENYING MOTION FOR

Respondent. PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT

15 [ECF Nos. 12, 16.]

17 18 Petitioner Roberto Angel Mendoza (“Petitioner”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and First Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (collectively “Petition”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on May 1, 2020 and July 18, 20201, respectively. (ECF Nos. 1, 25.) Petitioner also filed a motion for partial summary judgment. (ECF No. 12.) Respondent Marcus Pollard, the Warden, (“Respondent”) filed a motion to dismiss the Petition, (ECF No. 16), and an opposition to 25 1 The Court applies the mailbox rule to Petitioner’s filings. See Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 270–71 (1988) (holding that a pro se prisoner's…

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.