Locatelli

(HC) Lund v. Locatelli

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 31, 20232:21-cv-01831California408 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ERIC CURTIS LUND, No. 2:21-cv-01831 KJM DB P Petitioner, v. ORDER IZEN LOCATELLI, et al., Respondent. 16 Petitioner, a former state prisoner on postrelease community supervision proceeding pro se, has filed an application 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 August 16, 2022, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on all parties and contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. ECF No. 22. Fourteen days have passed and neither party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. The court presumes 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…

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.