Jane Ellen Benson v. Central California Women's Facility, Warden

Ninth Circuit

Jane Ellen Benson v. Central California Women's Facility, Warden

24 F.3d 244, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 19055, 1994 WL 161637

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedApril 29, 1994

Docket93-15524

StatusPublished

This text of 24 F.3d 244 (Jane Ellen Benson v. Central California Women's Facility, Warden) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Jane Ellen Benson v. Central California Women's Facility, Warden, 24 F.3d 244, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 19055, 1994 WL 161637 (9th Cir. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

24 F.3d 244
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.

Jane Ellen BENSON, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
CENTRAL CALIFORNIA WOMEN'S FACILITY, WARDEN, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 93-15524.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 14, 1994.*
Decided April 29, 1994.

Before: SCHROEDER, D.W. NELSON AND CANBY, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

We affirm the judgment of the district court and deny petitioner's motion to enlarge the record.

Petitioner may file another habeas corpus petition in the district court and may make a timely motion to enlarge the record at the district court. To prevail on a motion to enlarge the record, Petitioner will have to show cause and prejudice for failing to bring the newly discovered evidence forward earlier.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

*

The panel unanimously find this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a) and Ninth Circuit Rule 34-4

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI