California Rules of Court are unambiguous, clear, and purposeful.
California Rules of Court are unambiguous, clear, and purposeful. So why would a Judge who failed to rule on a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus within 60 days, completely ignore Rule 4.551(a)(6)(B) which mandates that he assign it to another judge to be put on calendar and decided without hearings within 30 days of the date of a filed Motion and Request for Ruling? Why would he sit on it another two weeks, negate 3 of the 4 claims in the petition, and order informal response from Respondents within 30 days - Court Rule Specifies 15 Days - and then go on leave for 30 days? Surely this Judge with over 20-years of experience must be knowledgeable of the Cal. Rules of Court especially the ones that are nondiscretionary. This wreaks of intentional Violation and Disregard of Petitioner's Due Process Rights. This is clearly a capricious act which demands rectification. A Judge who would knowingly and intentionally violate a Petitioner's Rights is a Judge that needs to be under strict scrutiny and possibly removed. This type of intentional act tears at the very fabric of our legal system.