Warden

(HC) Singh v. Warden

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 17, 20242:22-cv-01411California628 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 Pardeep Singh, No. 2:22-cv-01411-KJM-DMC-P 12 Petitioner,

ORDER

13 v. 14 Warden, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of 18 habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 19 Judge as provided by Eastern District of California local rules. 20 On September 5, 2023, the Magistrate Judge filed amended findings and 21 recommendations, which were served on the parties and which contained notice that the parties 22 may file objections within the time specified therein. Timely objections to the amended findings 23 and recommendations have been filed. 24 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, 25 this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having reviewed the file, the court finds 26 the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 27 ///// 28 ///// 1 …

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.