Ross

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 WILLIAM DEON PROBY, No. 2:21-cv-0852 KJM DB P Petitioner, v. ORDER TAMMY ROSS, Respondent. 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On September 27, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on petitioner and which contained notice to petitioner that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. (ECF No. 7.) Petitioner has not filed objections to the findings and recommendations. The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007)…