Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00331/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00331-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Danny Madrid
Petitioner
Kathy Mendoza-Powers
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DANNY MADRID,

Petitioner,

v.

KATHY MENDOZA-POWERS, Warden,

Respondent.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:07-cv-0331 OWW SMS HC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATION (DOC. #8)

ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR

WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AND

DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO

ENTER JUDGMENT

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a

petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.

On March 17, 2008, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings

and Recommendation that recommended the petition be GRANTED. The

Magistrate Judge further recommended that the Board of Parole

Hearings be DIRECTED to reverse its February 28, 2006, decision,

thereby ordering the release of Petitioner to any applicable term

of parole provided by California law, with credit for time since

the February 28, 2006, decision as if release had been granted

and any other term credit which he is entitled to by law. The

Findings and Recommendation was served on all parties and

contained notice that any objections were to be filed within

thirty (30) days of the date of service of the order.

Case 1:07-cv-00331-OWW -SMS Document 11 Filed 05/05/08 Page 1 of 3
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

On April 14, 2008, Respondent filed objections to the

Findings and Recommendation. Petitioner filed a reply to

Respondent’s objections on April 24, 2008. 

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a de novo review of the

case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file and having

considered the objections and opposition, the Court concludes

that the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation is

supported by the record and proper analysis, and there is no need

to modify the Findings and Recommendations based on the points

raised in the objections and opposition, except as noted below.

Respondent’s objections request a stay of the effect of this

decision pending the decision on its petition for review en banc

of Hayward, infra, although the Ninth Circuit’s website does not

show that en banc review has been granted. This request is

GRANTED, as the district court is required to follow Circuit

court precedent; however, there appears to be a substantial legal

question as to whether U.S. Supreme Court precedent is different

from the applicable law of this circuit. 

No certificate of appealability is required for an

administrative decision made by the Board of Parole Hearings.

IT IS ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendation issued March 17, 2008,

is ADOPTED IN PART;

2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is GRANTED;

3. Within thirty (30) days following issuance of the

mandate in Hayward v. Marshall, 512 F.3d 536, 542, Respondent

shall take the necessary steps to release Petitioner to any

Case 1:07-cv-00331-OWW -SMS Document 11 Filed 05/05/08 Page 2 of 3
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

3

applicable term of parole provided by California law, with credit

for time since the February 28, 2006, decision as if release had

been granted and any other term credit to which he is entitled by

law. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 2, 2008 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-00331-OWW -SMS Document 11 Filed 05/05/08 Page 3 of 3