From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Carl v. Horel

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 9, 2008
No. CIV S-07-1122 MCE KJM P (E.D. Cal. May. 9, 2008)

Opinion

No. CIV S-07-1122 MCE KJM P.

May 9, 2008


ORDER


Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local General Order No. 262.

On April 18, 2008, the this court recommended that respondent's motion to dismiss be denied because the underlying habeas petition was moot. Petitioner filed objections to the findings and recommendations supported by an exhibit, showing that the disciplinary hearing he challenged in this action was one of the three factors the parole board relied upon in denying him parole.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations (docket no. 9) are vacated; and

2. Within thirty days of the date of this order, respondent may file points and authorities addressing the question whether the Parole Board's reliance on the disciplinary as one of three factors to deny parole undercuts the finding of mootness. Petitioner's reply, if any, is due within fifteen days of the date respondent's points and authorities are filed.


Summaries of

Carl v. Horel

United States District Court, E.D. California
May 9, 2008
No. CIV S-07-1122 MCE KJM P (E.D. Cal. May. 9, 2008)
Case details for

Carl v. Horel

Case Details

Full title:CHARLES DANIEL CARL, Petitioner, v. ROBERT HOREL, Warden, et al.…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: May 9, 2008

Citations

No. CIV S-07-1122 MCE KJM P (E.D. Cal. May. 9, 2008)