Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05957/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05957-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID RAYMOND ANDREWS, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

STUART J. RYAN, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:04-cv-05957-REC-DLB-HC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 14)

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR

WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO ENTER

JUDGMENT FOR RESPONDENT

ORDER TERMINATING ACTION

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

On August 16, 2005, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and

Recommendations that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus be

DENIED, and judgment be entered in favor of Respondent, terminating

this action. These Findings and Recommendations were served on all

parties and contained notice that any objections were to be filed

within thirty (30) days from the date of service of that order. On

August 31, 2005, Petitioner filed objections to the Findings and

Recommendations.

//

Case 1:04-cv-05957-REC-DLB Document 16 Filed 09/29/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a de novo review of the case. 

Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including Petitioner's

objections, the Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge's

Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and proper

analysis. Petitioner's objections present no grounds for

questioning the Magistrate Judge's analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed August 16, 2005,

are ADOPTED IN FULL; 

2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED;

3. The Clerk of Court enter judgment for Respondent; and,

4. This action is therefore TERMINATED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 28, 2005 /s/ Robert E. Coyle 

668554 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05957-REC-DLB Document 16 Filed 09/29/05 Page 2 of 2