This case was last updated from California Courts Of Appeal on 10/19/2021 at 15:12:53 (UTC).

In re WILLIAM SOTO on Habeas Corpus

Case Summary

On 09/16/2021 In re WILLIAM SOTO on Habeas Corpus was filed as an Other lawsuit. This case was filed in California Courts Of Appeal, First Appellate District - Division 5 located in Statewide, California. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ***3464

  • Filing Date:

    09/16/2021

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Other

  • County, State:

    Statewide, California

 

Party Details

Petitioner

William Soto

San Diego, CA 92179

Respondent

The People

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Respondent Attorney

Office of the Attorney General

455 Golden Gate Avenue - Suite 11000

San Francisco, CA 94102-7004

Court Documents

Court documents are not available for this case.

 

Docket Entries

  • 09/27/2021
  • DispositionDescription: Petition summarily denied by order; Disposition Type: Final BY THE COURT:* The petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied. To the extent petitioner seeks relief under Senate Bill No. 136, the petition is repetitive of two prior petitions filed in case Nos. A160628 and A162170. (In re Miller (1941) 17 Cal.2d 734, 735.) Insofar as petitioner may seek relief under Senate Bill No. 1393, petitioner does not demonstrate, through record evidence, exhaustion of his superior court habeas corpus remedy. (In re Steele (2004) 32 Cal.4th 682, 692; In re Hillery (1962) 202 Cal.App.2d 293, 294; People v. Duvall (1995) 9 Cal.4th 464, 474.) Irrespective of the exhaustion problem, petitioner does not state a prima facie case for relief. (In re Swain (1949) 34 Cal.2d 300, 303-304.) * Before Simons, Acting P.J., Needham, J. and Burns, J.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/27/2021
  • DocketDescription: Case complete.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/27/2021
  • DocketDescription: Order denying petition filed.; Notes: BY THE COURT:* The petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied. To the extent petitioner seeks relief under Senate Bill No. 136, the petition is repetitive of two prior petitions filed in case Nos. A160628 and A162170. (In re Miller (1941) 17 Cal.2d 734, 735.) Insofar as petitioner may seek relief under Senate Bill No. 1393, petitioner does not demonstrate, through record evidence, exhaustion of his superior court habeas corpus remedy. (In re Steele (2004) 32 Cal.4th 682, 692; In re Hillery (1962) 202 Cal.App.2d 293, 294; People v. Duvall (1995) 9 Cal.4th 464, 474.) Irrespective of the exhaustion problem, petitioner does not state a prima facie case for relief. (In re Swain (1949) 34 Cal.2d 300, 303-304.) * Before Simons, Acting P.J., Needham, J. and Burns, J.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/16/2021
  • DocketDescription: Petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed.

    Read MoreRead Less
related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where People is a litigant