Pulley

Pulley v. Paramo

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaNovember 9, 20213:14-cv-02034California1,172 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ROBERT G. PULLEY, Case No.: 14-CV-2034 JLS (MDD)

Petitioner,

ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S

v. MOTION

DANIEL PARAMO, Warden; and (ECF No. 68) KAMALA D. HARRIS, Attorney 15 General, 16 Respondents. 17 This closed federal habeas corpus action was filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 by pro se state prisoner Robert G. Pulley. Almost two years after the conclusion of Petitioner’s most recent appeal in this matter, Petitioner filed the present post-judgment motion (“Mot.,” ECF No. 68). For the following reasons, Petitioner’s Motion is DENIED. BACKGROUND In August 2014, Petitioner filed a Petition for Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Court denied the Petition and entered judgment in favor of Respondents on November 14, 2016. ECF Nos. 54, 55. Petitioner filed multiple notices of appeal. See ECF Nos. 56, 57, 63. The Ninth Circuit denied Petitioner’s request for a certificate of 27 …

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.