From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McPherson v. Warden

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jul 19, 2023
2:23-cv-1014 WBS KJN P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 19, 2023)

Opinion

2:23-cv-1014 WBS KJN P

07-19-2023

MICHAEL BRUCE ANTHONY MCPHERSON, Petitioner, v. WARDEN, Respondent.


ORDER

KENDALL J. NEWMAN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On July 6, 2023, respondent was directed to file a responsive pleading within sixty days. (ECF No. 11.) Petitioner filed two documents in which he claims there are no facts in dispute, no evidentiary hearing is required, and appears to contend the court has the power to immediately release petitioner. (ECF Nos. 14, 15.) In his motion for relief, petitioner seeks immediate release. (ECF No. 15.)

Petitioner appears to believe that his case should be immediately granted. However, petitioner is mistaken. Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, respondent is entitled to respond to the petition, and then petitioner will have an opportunity to file a reply, if the response is an answer, or an opposition, if respondent files a motion to dismiss. Once the matter is fully briefed, then the matter will be submitted for decision.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner's motion (ECF No. 15) is denied.


Summaries of

McPherson v. Warden

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jul 19, 2023
2:23-cv-1014 WBS KJN P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 19, 2023)
Case details for

McPherson v. Warden

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL BRUCE ANTHONY MCPHERSON, Petitioner, v. WARDEN, Respondent.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jul 19, 2023

Citations

2:23-cv-1014 WBS KJN P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 19, 2023)