Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00097/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00097-1/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROSENDO MARTINEZ SERVIN,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-05-0097 GEB KJM P

vs.

JEANNE WOODFORD,

Respondent. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has

filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States

Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local

General Order No. 262.

On May 4, 2005, the magistrate judge filed findings and

recommendations herein which were served on petitioner and which

contained notice to petitioner that any objections to the

findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. 

Petitioner has filed objections to the findings and

Case 2:05-cv-00097-GEB -KJM Document 13 Filed 06/10/05 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

1 In his objections, petitioner asks that the court stay

this matter until petitioner exhausts state court remedies with

respect to his claims. However, under Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S.

509 (1982), a habeas application containing any unexhausted

claims must be dismissed. When the court dismisses a habeas

application containing both exhausted and unexhausted claims, the

court can grant the petitioner leave to file an amended

application containing only exhausted claims. Then, the court

can proceed on the exhausted claims, or possibly stay the

exhausted claims pending further exhaustion. However, because

all of petitioner’s claims are unexhausted, the Supreme Court,

through Rose, demands that this entire action be dismissed.

2

recommendations.1

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

§ 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72-304, this court has conducted a

de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the

entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to

be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed May 4, 2005,

are adopted in full; and

2. Petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas

corpus is dismissed for failure to exhaust state remedies.

Dated: June 9, 2005

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:05-cv-00097-GEB -KJM Document 13 Filed 06/10/05 Page 2 of 2