Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01520/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01520-3/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

RAMIRO MATA TAPIA, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

M.S. EVANS, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:06-cv-01520-LJO-DLB-HC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 14)

ORDER DISMISSING CERTAIN

CLAIMS

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a

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

On May 10, 2007, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and

Recommendations that Grounds One and Four of the Petition for Writ

of Habeas Corpus be DISMISSED for failure to state a claim

cognizable under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 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 June 22, 2007, Petitioner

filed objections to the Findings and Recommendations.

//

/

Case 1:06-cv-01520-DLB Document 17 Filed 07/09/07 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 May 10, 2007, are

ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. Grounds One and Four of the Petition for Writ of Habeas

Corpus are DISMISSED for failure to state a claim cognizable under

28 U.S.C. § 2254; and

3. The matter is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for

issuance of a briefing schedule. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 6, 2007 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-01520-DLB Document 17 Filed 07/09/07 Page 2 of 2