In re TIMOTHY ROSS on Habeas Corpus
<script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript"> </script> <script type="text/javascript"> _uacct = "UA-1698443-1"; urchinTracker(); </script> <html ><br /> <head><br /> <title>In re TIMOTHY ROSS on Habeas Corpus</title><br /> </head><br /> <body><br /> <div><br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/><b >In re TIMOTHY ROSS on Habeas Corpus</b><br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/>Filed 7/1/10<br /> <br/><u> </u><br /> <br/><u> </u><br /> <br/><u> </u><br /> <br/><u> </u><br /> <br/><u> </u><br /> <br/><u>CERTIFIED<br /> FOR PUBLICATION</u><br /> <br/><u> </u><br /> <br/><u> </u><br /> <br/><u> </u><br /> <br/>IN THE COURT OF<br /> APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA<br /> <br/>THIRD APPELLATE<br /> DISTRICT<br /> <br/>(Shasta)<br /> <br/>----<br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <table class=MsoNormalTable border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0<br /> ><br /> <tr ><br /> <td width=394 valign=top ><br /> <br/>In re TIMOTHY ROSS on Habeas<br /> Corpus.<br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> </td><br /> <td width=230 valign=top ><br /> <br/>C062466<br /> <br/> <br /> <br/>(Super.Ct.No.<br /> 06HB1582)<br /> <br/> <br /> <br/>ORDER<br /> MODIFYING OPINION AND DENYING REHEARING; NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT<br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> </td><br /> </tr><br /> </table><br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/>THE<br /> COURT:<br /> <br/> It is ordered that the opinion filed in<br /> this case on June 11, 2010, be modified<br /> in the following particulars:<br /> <br/> 1. <br /> On page 11, footnote 5, delete the five word introductory phrase of the<br /> first sentence (Although not cited by Ross,) so that the first sentence of the<br /> footnote reads: <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/><i<br /> >In re Masoner</i> (2009) 179 Cal.App.4th<br /> 1531 (hereafter <i >Masoner</i>) held that,<br /> when a court concludes there is no evidence to support the Governor's<br /> reversal of the Board's parole suitability finding, the remedy is to reinstate<br /> the Board's finding, rather than to remand the matter to the Governor for<br /> further reconsideration in accordance with due process of law. <br /> <br/> There is no change in the judgment.<br /> <br/> The petition for rehearing is denied. <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/>FOR THE COURT:<br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/><u> SCOTLAND </u>, P. J.<br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/><u> NICHOLSON </u>, J.<br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/><u> ROBIE </u>, J.<br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> <br/>Publication Courtesy of San<br /> Diego County Legal Resource Directory.<br /> <br/>Analysis and review provided by San Diego County Property line attorney.<br /> <br/>San Diego Case Information<br /> provided by www.fearnotlaw.com<br /> <br/> <br /> <br/> <br /> </div><br /> </body><br /> </html><br />