Metcalf

Metcalf v. Newland

Good Law
28 F. Supp. 2d 1164·1998 WL 802605·1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21076
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaAugust 21, 1998CV F 97 6030 OWW HGB PCalifornia2,296 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wanger, J.

ORDER RE: FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS (#12)

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has 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. § 616 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72-302.

On June 26, 1998, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within thirty (30) days. On July 22, 1998, petitioner filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 73-305, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.

Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on June 28, 1998, are adopted in full; and

2. Petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus is denied.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION RE:…

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.