Arevalo v. Hennessy
Filing
23
ORDER CONDITIONALLY GRANTING 1 WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS. Signed by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. on 2/9/2018. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/9/2018)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
ERICK AREVALO,
Plaintiff,
8
v.
9
10
VICKI HENNESSY,
Defendant.
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California
Case No.17-cv-06676-HSG
ORDER CONDITIONALLY
GRANTING WRIT OF HABEAS
CORPUS
Re: Dkt. No. 1
12
Petitioner Erick Arevalo filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus on November 20, 2017.
13
14
Dkt. No. 1. On December 22, 2017, this Court dismissed his petition on abstention grounds. See
15
Dkt. No. 16. Petitioner filed a notice of appeal on December 26, 2017. Dkt. No. 18. On February
16
9, 2018, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed this Court’s order of dismissal and
17
remanded the case with instructions. See Arevalo v. Hennessy, No. 17-17545, slip op. at 10-11
18
(9th Cir. Feb. 9, 2018). The Ninth Circuit’s mandate also issued on February 9, 2018.
19
//
20
//
21
//
22
//
23
//
24
//
25
//
26
//
27
//
28
//
1
Accordingly, the Court CONDITIONALLY GRANTS the petition as follows: the writ of
2
habeas corpus shall issue unless the California Superior Court conducts a new, constitutionally
3
compliant bail hearing in the underlying criminal case within 14 days of the date of this order.
4
The Court assumes this bail hearing will comply with the standards set forth in In re Humphrey,
5
No. A152056, 2018 WL 550512 (Cal. Ct. App. Jan. 25, 2018), which the California Court of
6
Appeal decided after this Court issued its dismissal order.
7
8
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: 2/9/2018
9
10
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.
United States District Judge
United States District Court
Northern District of California
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?