Johnson v. Unknown

Filing 9

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 10/16/13 denying 8 Motion for Reconsideration. (Dillon, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

OSHAY L. JOHNSON,

12

Petitioner,

13
14

No. 2:13-cv-00878 CKD P

v.

ORDER

UNKNOWN,

15

Respondent.

16
17
18

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

19

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner has consented to this court’s jurisdiction pursuant to 28

20

U.S.C. § 636(c) and Local Rule 302. Before the court is petitioner’s September 10, 2013 motion

21

for reconsideration of the August 20, 2013 order dismissing the petition as successive.
Local Rule 305(c) provides: “Upon the entry of a final judgment in any action disposed of

22
23

by a Magistrate Judge on consent of the parties under the authority of 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and

24

these Rules, an aggrieved party may appeal directly to the United States Court of Appeals for the

25

Ninth Circuit in the same manner as governs appeals from any other final judgment of the Court.”

26

/////

27

/////

28
1

1

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(c). Moreover, the undersigned’s August 20, 2013 order is not “clearly

2

erroneous or contrary to law.”1 See Local Rule 303(f).
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT petitioner’s motion for reconsideration

3
4

(ECF No. 8) is denied.

5

Dated: October 16, 2013

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

6
7
8
9
10
11

2 / john0878.R60_consent

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1

26
27
28

Petitioner argues that the petition is not successive because he was effectively re-sentenced
when, in 2011, the Sacramento County Superior Court issued an amended abstract of judgment of
his 1993 conviction and sentence. But see ECF No. 1 at 47-49 (amended abstract of judgment
“clarifies, but does not revise, the indeterminate term” while “[t]he determinate term remains
unchanged.”)
2