(HC) Jackson v. Martinez

Opinion

YONNIE JACKSON, No. 2:17-cv-01311-TLN-CKD Petitioner, v. ORDER Respondent. Petitioner, a California prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a motion asking the Court to reconsider its October 13, 2021 order denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. A district court may reconsider a ruling under either Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) or 60(b). See Sch. Dist. Number. 1J, Multnomah County v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993). “Reconsideration is appropriate if the district court (1) is presented with newly discovered evidence, (2) committed clear error or the initial decision was manifestly unjust, or (3) if there is an intervening change in controlling law.” Id. at 1263. Petitioner does not present newly discovered evidence and there has not been a change in the law. Furthermore, the Court finds that, after a de novo review of this case, the decision to deny the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is not clearly erroneous nor manifestly unjust. /// /// Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 40) is DENIED. DATED: January 28, 2022

Troy L. Nuhlep ] United States District Judge >