Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06526/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06526-3/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

ROBERT EVANS, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

MIKE EVANS, Warden, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:04-cv-06526-REC-DLB-HC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 17)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

DISMISS PETITION FOR WRIT

OF HABEAS CORPUS (Doc. 10)

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION

FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO

ENTER JUDGMENT

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a

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

On June 17, 2005, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and

Recommendations that Respondent's Motion to Dismiss the Petition

for Writ of Habeas Corpus be GRANTED, that the Petition for Writ of

Habeas Corpus be DISMISSED, and that the Clerk of Court be DIRECTED

to enter judgment. 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 July 11, 2005, Petitioner filed a motion to extend time.

Case 1:04-cv-06526-REC-DLB Document 20 Filed 09/07/05 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

On August 10, 2005, the court granted Petitioner an additional

fifteen (15) days within which to respond. However, to date,

Petitioner has not filed objections to the Findings and

Recommendations.

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, the Court concludes that

the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations are supported

by the record and proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed June 17, 2005,

are ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. Respondent's Motion to Dismiss the Petition for Writ of

Habeas Corpus, filed May 3, 2005, is GRANTED;

3. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DISMISSED; and,

4. The Clerk of Court enter judgment.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 7, 2005 /s/ Robert E. Coyle 

668554 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-06526-REC-DLB Document 20 Filed 09/07/05 Page 2 of 2