Neuschmid

(HC) Zimmerman v. Neuschmid

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 13, 20192:19-cv-01736California867 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KENNETH ZIMMERMAN, No. 2:19-cv-01736-TLN-GGH Petitioner, v. ORDER ROBERT NEUSCHMID, Warden, Respondent. 16 Petitioner Kenneth Zimmerman (“Petitioner”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this 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 September 17, 2019, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on Petitioner and which contained notice to Petitioner that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 6.) On October 4, 2019, Petitioner filed his “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation.” (ECF No. 7.) This Court reviews de novo those portions of the proposed findings of fact to which objection has been made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); McDonnell…

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.