Patterson

Patterson v. Runnels

Good Law
288 F. Supp. 2d 1092·2003 WL 22433341·2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23738
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaOctober 6, 2003CV 03-5465-RGK(CT)California9,229 words

Opinion

Opinion

Klausner, J.

ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION FOR WRIT OF HA-BEAS CORPUS BY A PERSON IN STATE CUSTODY AND MOTION TO STAY

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 636 , the court has reviewed the entire file de novo, including the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation and petitioner’s objections.

In his objections, petitioner, who has been represented by counsel in this case and in case number CV 03-3273, asserts that he still should have the opportunity to object to the magistrate judge’s July 16, 2003 report and recommendation, which concluded that claims one and four were unexhausted. However, petitioner already had this opportunity. On July 24, 2003, petitioner filed a response to the July 16, 2003 report and recommendation in case number CV 03-3273. Significantly, in this response petitioner conceded that claims one and four were unexhausted. Petitioner requested that “the petition not be dismissed[,]” and that “the three exhausted claims and the petition itself be held in abeyance until the unexhausted claims can be filed and heard in the California [cjourts.” Petitioner stated that “either the two unexhausted claims will be exhausted in the state court, or they…

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.