Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00042/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00042-0/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

27

28

U.S . District Court

 E. D . California cd 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN RICHARD GIBSON, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

)

v. )

)

)

LEA ANN CHRONES, Warden, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

CV F 05 0042 AWI LJO HC

ORDER CONSTRUING PETITIONER’S

MOTION TO AMEND AS A MOTION FOR

JUDICIAL NOTICE

[Doc. #28]

ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S

MOTION FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 

[Doc. #28]

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

On June 16, 2005, Petitioner filed a motion to amend the petition to include the recent

decision of the California Supreme Court in In re Dannenberg, 34 Cal.4th 1061 (2005). It appears

Petitioner merely wishes to notify the Court of the decision and request that it be considered in the

Court’s review of the merits of the petition. In order to avoid the burdensome process of amending

the petition, the Court CONSTRUES Petitioner’s request as a motion for judicial notice. 

A court may take judicial notice of court records. See MGIC Indem. Co. v. Weisman, 803

F.2d 500, 505 (9th Cir.1986); United States v. Wilson, 631 F.2d 118, 119 (9th Cir.1980). While the

Case 1:05-cv-00042-AWI-GSA Document 30 Filed 06/28/05 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

U.S . District Court

 E. D . California cd 2

California Supreme Court’s opinion is not binding precedent on this Court, it may be of persuasive

value in the Court’s determination of the merits of Petitioner’s claims. Accordingly, the Court

hereby TAKES judicial notice of the California Supreme Court’s opinion in In re Dannenberg, 34

Cal.4th 1061 (2005). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 27, 2005 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00042-AWI-GSA Document 30 Filed 06/28/05 Page 2 of 2