(HC)Gilmore

(HC)Gilmore v. Hill

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaApril 18, 20223:20-cv-02230California2,993 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. INTRODUCTION

Petitioner Steven Gilmore (“Petitioner”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (“Petition”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 presenting a single claim challenging the validity of a guilty plea. (Docs. 1, 8.) Respondent Rick Hill (“Respondent”), Warden of Folsom State Prison, filed a response in opposition on November 3, 2021. (Doc. 29.) Petitioner filed a reply brief on January 28, 2021. (Doc. 34.) The motion was referred to U.S. Magistrate Judge Mitchell D. Dembin Civil Rule 72.1(d). After a thorough review of the papers on file, the facts, and the applicable law, the Court respectfully RECOMMENDS Petitioner’s Petition be DENIED. II. BACKGROUND A. Conviction In 1991, Judge Thomas J. Whelan of the San Diego Superior Court sentenced Petitioner to eight years in prison for voluntary manslaughter (Cal. Penal Code § 192(a)), kidnapping (Cal. Penal Code § 207(a)), and firearm enhancements (Cal. Penal Code § 12022(a)), pursuant to a plea agreement. (Doc. 18–3 at 15). In 2001, a…

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.