Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01700/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01700-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Clifton James Jackson
Petitioner
Ponce
Respondent

Document Text:

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

HEATHER E. WILLIAMS, State Bar #122664 

Federal Defender 

CAROLYN M. WIGGIN, Bar #182732 

Assistant Federal Defender 

801 I Street, 3rd Floor 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

Tel: 916-498-5700/Fax 916-498-5710 

carolyn_wiggin@fd.org 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

CLIFTON JAMES JACKSON 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

CLIFTON JAMES JACKSON,

Petitioner, 

v. 

FELICIA PONCE, Warden,

Respondent. 

No. Case No. 2:15-CV-01700 GGH 

NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY 

DISMISSAL; ORDER 

 

Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Petitioner, 

CLIFTON JAMES JACKSON, by and through his counsel Assistant Federal 

Defender Carolyn M. Wiggin, hereby requests the voluntarily dismissal of Mr. 

Jackson’s petition for writ of habeas, filed August 10, 2015. He respectfully 

// 

// 

// 

// 

// 

// 

// 

// 

Case 2:15-cv-01700-GGH Document 16 Filed 04/26/16 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

requests the Court issue order lodged herewith. 

Dated: April 21, 2016 

HEATHER E. WILLIAMS 

 Federal Defender 

 /s/ Carolyn M. Wiggin 

 CAROLYN M. WIGGIN 

 Assistant Federal Defender 

 Attorney for Petitioner 

 CLIFTON JAMES JACKSON 

Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and good cause 

appearing therefor, the petition for writ of habeas corpus, filed August 10, 2015 

(ECF 1), is DISMISSED.1

 

Dated: April 26, 2016 

 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

 

/Jack1700.41 

 

1

 The parties have consented to the undersigned presiding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 636(c). 

Because respondent’s motion is neither an answer nor motion for summary judgment (a motion 

which goes to the merits of the action), this voluntary dismissal is appropriate pursuant to Rule 

41(a)(1).. 

Case 2:15-cv-01700-GGH Document 16 Filed 04/26/16 Page 2 of 2