Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01701/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01701-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARILYN LOIS TREVINO,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-07-1701 MCE KJM P

vs.

SISKIYOU SUPERIOR COURT 

JUVENILE DIVISION, et al.,

 

Respondents. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Petitioner has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner has paid the filing fee. While it is not entirely clear, it appears

petitioner challenges termination of parental rights. This is not a proper § 2254 claim as a claim

brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 can only be entertained if the petitioner challenges his or her

custody by a state on the grounds that he or she is in custody in violation of the Constitution or

other federal laws. For these reasons, the court will recommend that petitioner’s application for

writ of habeas corpus be dismissed. 

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that

petitioner’s application for writ of habeas corpus brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 be dismissed.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

Case 2:07-cv-01701-MCE -KJM Document 7 Filed 10/09/07 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

Findings and Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 

DATED: October 9, 2007. 

1/mp

trev1701.fnrs

Case 2:07-cv-01701-MCE -KJM Document 7 Filed 10/09/07 Page 2 of 2