No. 22-385

Roger David Towers v. Mike Hamasaki

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2022-10-25
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response WaivedRelisted (2)
Tags: article-iii civil-procedure civil-rights discretionary-review due-process habeas judicial-referral magistrate-assignment standing void-for-vagueness
Latest Conference: 2023-02-17 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)

1. In light of CAED district judge 's admission
that they are "wholly unable to handle civil
matters and the district court 's order assigning
this case to district judge "NONE "; was the
referral to a magistrate lawful ?

2. In light of the district judge 's ruling claiming
: that summary judgment is unavailable on
habeas; and who has otherwise failed to follow
clearly established law; should this Court
invoke its supervisory authority to prevent a
systemic abuse of discretion and/or complete
miscarriage of justice ? '

3. Is California Code of Civil Procedure §527.8, a
statute which fails to include any useful
standards to the situations which it applies,
void for vagueness?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the referral to a magistrate was lawful given the district judge's admission of being 'wholly unable to handle civil matters

Docket Entries

2023-02-21
Rehearing DENIED.
2023-01-25
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/17/2023.
2023-01-06
2022-12-12
Petition DENIED.
2022-11-22
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/9/2022.
2022-11-19
Waiver of right of respondent Mike Hamasaki to respond filed.
2022-08-22
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 25, 2022)

Attorneys

Mike Hamasaki
Tami Michelle KrenzinOffice of the Attorney General, Respondent
Roger David Towers
Roger David Towers — Petitioner