Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00727/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-00727-2/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

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RUDY JIMENEZ,

Petitioner,

v.

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, 

COUNTY OF KINGS,

Respondent.

Case No. 1:19-cv-00727-JDP (HC)

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO 

SUMMARILY DISMISS PETITION

OBJECTIONS DUE IN FOURTEEN DAYS

ECF No. 1

ORDER ASSIGNING THIS CASE TO A 

DISTRICT JUDGE 

Petitioner Rudy Jimenez, a state prisoner without counsel, filed a “Petition for 

Resentencing” under California Penal Code Section 1170.95. ECF No. 1. The matter is before 

the court for preliminary review under Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, which 

the court may apply in all habeas proceedings. See Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, Rule 

1(b); cf. 28 U.S.C. § 2243. Under Rule 4, the court must examine the habeas corpus petition and 

order a response to the petition unless it “plainly appears” that the petitioner is not entitled to 

relief.

On May 29, 2019, we ordered petitioner to show cause why his petition should not be 

summarily dismissed. ECF No. 6. We found the petition deficient because it: (1) is addressed to 

the wrong court, (2) fails to make any legal arguments in support of the relief requested, and (3) is

Case 1:19-cv-00727-DAD-JDP Document 11 Filed 02/07/20 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

27

28

2

untimely. ECF No. 6 at 1-2. We granted petitioner fourteen days to respond to the order, and 

allowed an additional fifteen days at petitioner’s request. ECF No. 9. Petitioner did not respond. 

Because it plainly appears that the petitioner is not entitled to relief, we find the petition deficient 

and recommend it be dismissed.

Order

The clerk of court is directed to assign this case to a district judge who will review the 

findings and recommendations.

Findings and Recommendations

We recommend that the court dismiss the petition. ECF No. 1. These findings and 

recommendations are submitted to the U.S. District Court judge presiding over this case under 28 

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Rule 304 of the Local Rules of Practice for the United States District 

Court, Eastern District of California. Within 14 days of the service of the findings and 

recommendations, any party may file written objections to the findings and recommendations 

with the court and serve a copy on all parties. That document must be captioned “Objections to 

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” The district judge will then review the 

findings and recommendations under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 6, 2020 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

No. 206.

Case 1:19-cv-00727-DAD-JDP Document 11 Filed 02/07/20 Page 2 of 2