(HC) Lucero v. McDonald ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ALBERT ANDREW LUCERO, Case No. 1:10-CV-01714-AWI-SKO-HC 12 Petitioner, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE CASE 13 v. 14 KIM HOLLAND, Warden, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, Albert Andrew Lucero, is a state prisoner proceeding with an application for 18 writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner filed his petition for writ of habeas 19 corpus on September 10, 2010, alleging five grounds for habeas relief: (1) improper admission 20 of evidence; (2) violation of Petitioner’s right to confrontation; (3) insufficient evidence; (4) 21 violation of Petitioner’s Due Process Rights; and (5) state law errors. 22 On May 15, 2015, the District Court denied the petition and entered judgment for 23 Respondent. Petitioner appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. On August 31, 2018, 24 the Ninth Circuit affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded the petition with instructions 25 for this Court to grant Petitioner’s petition for writ of habeas corpus on his claim that his 26 conviction for possession of a shank while in custody (Cal. Penal Code §4502(a)) violated 27 Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979). 1 | been resentenced as of February 8, 2021, in accordance with the Court’s order. (Doc. 77.) In 2 | support, Respondent has attached a copy of the minute order entered in Stanislaus County 3 | Superior Court reflecting that the sentence on count 3 was vacated and Petitioner was resentenced 4 | on the other counts. (Doc. 77 at 4.) 5 Accordingly, insofar as Petitioner has been granted relief in accordance with the Ninth 6 | Circuit’s remand order, the Court hereby DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to close the case. 7 IS SO ORDERED. g Pated: _ October 4, 2022 ZS : Cb ut — SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28