Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02350/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02350-9/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

CARL McCEE FOUNTAIN,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-2350 GEB DAD P

vs.

JAMES YATES, Warden,

Respondent. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this 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 Rule 302.

On June 4, 2010, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein

which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to

the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. Petitioner has filed

objections to the findings and recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule

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.

Case 2:04-cv-02350-GEB-DAD Document 69 Filed 07/13/10 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

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed June 4, 2010, are adopted in full;

2. Petitioner’s March 19, 2010, request for reconsideration, construed as a

successive habeas petition (Docket No. 58), is dismissed without prejudice to its refiling after 

obtaining authorization from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals; and

3. For the reasons set forth in the magistrate judge’s June 4, 2010 findings and

recommendations, petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional

right. Accordingly, a certificate of appealability should not issue in this action.

Dated: July 12, 2010

 

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-02350-GEB-DAD Document 69 Filed 07/13/10 Page 2 of 2