From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Everts v. Yates

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Oct 26, 2011
No. C 09-4857 JSW (PR) (N.D. Cal. Oct. 26, 2011)

Opinion

No. C 09-4857 JSW (PR) Docket No. 14

10-26-2011

FREDERICK WILLIAM EVERTS, Petitioner, v. JAMES YATES, Warden, Respondent.


ORDER DENYING

RECONSIDERATION

This is a habeas corpus case filed pro se by a state prisoner pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The petition was denied on its merits. Petitioner has filed a motion to alter or amend the judgment under Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A motion for reconsideration under Rule 59(e) "'should not be granted, absent highly unusual circumstances, unless the district court is presented with newly discovered evidence, committed clear error, or if there is an intervening change in the law."' McDowell v. Calderon, 197 F.3d 1253, 1255 (9th Cir. 1999) (citation omitted) (en banc). Petitioner does not submit new evidence or a change in the law. Rather, he argues that the Court committed clear error in finding that burden of proof on the element of intent was not unconstitutionally shifted or lowered by California's scheme for proving insanity. Petitioner has not shown that it is unconstitutional for a state to require a defendant to prove his insanity, whether by a preponderance of the evidence or beyond a reasonable doubt. See Leland v. Oregon, 343 U.S. 790, 798-99 (1952); see Clark v. Arizona, 548 U.S. 735 769, (2006) (citing Leland). He also contests the Court's finding that the fact-finder found Petitioner guilty of all the elements of his offense before making a sanity determination. That is what the record reflects, however, and his disagreement with the Court's reading of the record does not establish clear error.

Thus, petitioner's motion (docket number 14) is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

JEFFREY S. WHITE

United States District Judge

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


FOR THE


NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FREDERICK WILLIAM EVERTS, Plaintiff,

v.

JANES YATES et al, Defendant.

Case Number: CV09-04857 JSW


CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California.

That on October 26, 2011, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

Frederick W. Everts

F62994

Pleasant Valley State Prison

P.O. Box 8500

Coalinga, CA 93210

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: Jennifer Ottolini, Deputy Clerk


Summaries of

Everts v. Yates

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Oct 26, 2011
No. C 09-4857 JSW (PR) (N.D. Cal. Oct. 26, 2011)
Case details for

Everts v. Yates

Case Details

Full title:FREDERICK WILLIAM EVERTS, Petitioner, v. JAMES YATES, Warden, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Oct 26, 2011

Citations

No. C 09-4857 JSW (PR) (N.D. Cal. Oct. 26, 2011)