Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-00957/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-00957-1/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HOWARD HERSHIPS, No. 2:15-CV-0957-TLN-CMK-P

Petitioner, 

vs. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

SUPERIOR COURT OF

CALIFORNIA,

Respondent.

 /

Petitioner, who is not in custody and who is proceeding pro se, brings this petition

for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Pending before the court is petitioner’s

petition for a writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1).

Rule 4 of the Federal Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases provides for summary

dismissal of a habeas petition “[i]f it plainly appears from the face of the petition and any

exhibits annexed to it that the petitioner is not entitled to relief in the district court.” In the

instant case, it is plain that petitioner is not entitled to federal habeas relief. Petitioner challenges

the imposition of an $1,010.00 fine by the Sacramento County Superior Court for violation of the

California Vehicle Code. Such a claim is not cognizable under § 2254. See Bailey v. Hill, 599

1

Case 2:15-cv-00957-TLN-CMK Document 13 Filed 07/17/15 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

F.3d 976, 980 (9th Cir. 2010). 

Based on the foregoing, the undersigned recommends that petitioner’s petition for

a writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1) be summarily dismissed and all pending motions be denied as

moot. 

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 14 days

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

objections with the court. Responses to objections shall be filed within 14 days after service of

objections. Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal. 

See Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: July 16, 2015

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2

Case 2:15-cv-00957-TLN-CMK Document 13 Filed 07/17/15 Page 2 of 2