Preview:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO

MILTON GERARD ESQUIBEL, Case No. 4:11-cv-00544-BLW Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER

STATE OF IDAHO, Respondent.

United States Magistrate Judge Ronald E. Bush conducted an initial review of Milton Gerard Esquibel's "Great Writ of Habeas Corpus," construed as a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, and concluded that the Petition contained several deficiencies that prevented Petitioner from going forward. (Dkt. 7.) Judge Bush ordered Petitioner to respond, and Petitioner has now done so. Due to the lack of consent to proceeding before a United States Magistrate Judge, the case has since been reassigned to the undersigned District Judge. (Dkt. 8.) The Court has reviewed the record, including Petitioner's Motion to Proceed, and agrees with Judge Bush's analysis and conclusions in the Initial Review Order. The statements and allegations in the Petition are disjointed and difficult to follow, but it appears that Petitioner is challenging the legality of his convictions in Cassia County Case No. CR-2009-6661, wherein he was convicted of misdemeanor charges for
ORDER - 1

contempt of court, disturbing the peace, resisting or obstructing officers, and threats against state elected officials.1 Interspersed among his comments in his Motion to Proceed about the "corporate names" of the various state entities involved and a list of apparently all of his filings in state court, Petitioner mentions in a conclusory fashion that his federal constitutional rights were violated during the state criminal proceedings. But the Court agrees with Judge Bush that Petitioner has failed to connect any alleged constitutional violations to a set of facts from which the Court could make out a federal claim for relief. Petitioner also seems to rely on state law, but the Court has no authority to issue a writ of habeas corpus to correct violations of state law. See, e.g., Swarthout v. Cooke, 131 S.Ct. 859, 862

Download 10.pdf

Idaho Law