(HC) Hubbard v. Glenn County Superior Court

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 16, 20202:20-cv-01232California345 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DALE WESLEY HUBBARD, Jr., No. 2:20-cv-01232 KJM GGH P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 GLENN COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas 18 corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as 19 provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On August 7, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were 21 served on petitioner and which contained notice to petitioner that any objections to the findings 22 and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. ECF No. 5. Petitioner has not 23 filed objections to the findings and recommendations.1 24 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 25 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed 26 de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th…

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.