Ricky Lee Earp v. Jeanne Woodford

Filing 353

JUDGMENT by Judge Margaret M. Morrow, in favor of Robert L Ayers, Jr against Ricky Lee Earp: IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that 1. Earp's petition for the writ of habeas corpus is denied with prejudice; and 2. The action be, and it hereby is, dismissed. (see document for further details) (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (bm)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RICKY LEE EARP, Petitioner, vs. MICHAEL MARTEL, Warden of the California State Prison at San Quentin, Respondent. ) CASE NO. CV 00-06508 MMM ) ) ) JUDGMENT ) ) ) ) ) ) On February 27, 2003, Judge Manuel L. Real issued an order dismissing all nineteen claims in Ricky Lee Earp’s petition for writ of habeas corpus. On September 8, 2005, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of all but two of the claims. It remanded Earp’s prosecutorial misconduct and ineffective assistance of counsel claims to the district court for an evidentiary hearing. On March 11, 2008, Judge Real issued an order dismissing Earp’s prosecutorial misconduct and ineffective assistance of counsel claims. On October 19, 2010, the Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of the ineffective assistance of counsel claim, reversed the dismissal of the prosecutorial misconduct claim, and remanded and reassigned that claim to another judge for a further evidentiary hearing. The matter was subsequently assigned to this court. On December 14, 2015, the court issued an order dismissing Earp’s prosecutorial misconduct claim, which was his last remaining claim. Consequently, 1 IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that 2 1. Earp’s petition for the writ of habeas corpus is denied with prejudice; and 3 2. The action be, and it hereby is, dismissed. 4 5 6 DATED: December 14, 2015 MARGARET M. MORROW UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?