Keenan

Joseph Arthur Nunn v. Stefanie Keenan

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 29, 20252:24-cv-00676California648 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JOSEPH ARTHUR NUNN, No. 2:24-cv-00676-TLN-EFB Petitioner, v. ORDER STEFANIE KEENAN, Respondent. 16 Petitioner Joseph Arthur Nunn (“Petitioner”), a state prisoner proceeding with counsel, filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On June 13, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on Petitioner and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 12.) Petitioner filed objections. (ECF No. 14.) In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, the Court conducted a de novo review of this case. See also Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007). Having carefully reviewed the entire file,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.