Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00706/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00706-6/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CAYETANO T. LARA, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

DERRAL ADAMS, Warden, )

)

Respondent. )

____________________________________)

1:08-CV-00706 OWW GSA HC 

ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S

MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT

ENTITLED “MOTION FOR MISCARRIAGE

OF JUSTICE”

[Doc. #29]

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

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

On November 20, 2008, the undersigned granted Respondent’s motion to dismiss, dismissed

the case for violating the statute of limitations, and directed that judgment be entered. The Clerk of

Court entered judgment on the same date.

On July 20, 2009, Petitioner filed a motion for relief from judgment pursuant to Federal

Rules of Civil Procedure § 60(b). On August 4, 2009, the undersigned denied Petitioner’s motion.

On February 1, 2010, Petitioner filed another motion, this time entitled, “Motion for Cause

and Prejudice.” Petitioner again sought relief from judgment, renewing the same arguments as

before. On February 16, 2010, the undersigned denied the motion and once again informed Petitioner

that his arguments have already been addressed and his motion presented no basis for relief.

U.S. District Court

E. D. California 1

Case 1:08-cv-00706-OWW -GSA Document 31 Filed 03/04/10 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

On February 18, 2010, Petitioner filed the instant motion, this time entitled, “Motion for

Miscarriage of Justice.” Petitioner again attempts to relitigate his case. Petitioner is informed that

this case is closed. His arguments have been heard and relief has been denied. 

Accordingly, the instant motion is DENIED, and Petitioner is informed that any further

filings will be stricken.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 3, 2010 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

U.S. District Court

E. D. California 2

Case 1:08-cv-00706-OWW -GSA Document 31 Filed 03/04/10 Page 2 of 2