Warden

(HC) Singh v. Warden

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaAugust 28, 20232:22-cv-01411California645 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 PARDEEP SINGH, No. 2:22-cv-01411-KJM-DMC-P Petitioner,

ORDER

v. WARDEN, Respondent. 16 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this 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 Eastern District of California local rules. On June 15, 2023, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on the parties and which contained notice that the parties may file objections within the time specified therein. Timely objections to the findings and recommendations have been filed. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having reviewed the file, the court declines to adopt the findings and recommendations. First, the magistrate judge recommends dismissing the petition for lack of jurisdiction because…

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.