Thompson

(HC) Tran v. Thompson

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 23, 20222:21-cv-01707California309 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DOUGLAS TRAN, No. 2:21-cv-01707 KJM DB P Petitioner, v. ORDER PAUL THOMPSON, Respondent. 16 Petitioner, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. 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 January 25, 2022, 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 20 days. 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) (“[D]eterminations of law 27 …

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.