Soto

(HC) Barber v. Soto

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 7, 20202:16-cv-00379California565 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DUPREE PIERRE BARBER, No. 2:16-cv-00379-TLN-AC 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 J. SOTO, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner Dupree Pierre Barber (“Petitioner”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed 18 an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred 19 to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On June 26, 2020, the magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations herein 21 which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to 22 the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one (21) days. (ECF No. 20.) 23 Neither party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 24 Accordingly, the Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. 25 United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 26 reviewed de novo. See…

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.