Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01163/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01163-4/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VASHON TYRONE JACKSON, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

PAM AHLIN, Executive Director )

of the Coalinga State )

Hospital, ) 

 )

Respondent. )

)

 )

1:12-cv—01163-AWI-SKO-HC

ORDER RE: FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. 13)

ORDER DISMISSING PETITIONER’S

STATE LAW CLAIMS WITHOUT LEAVE TO

AMEND (DOC. 1)

ORDER REFERRING THE PETITION BACK

TO THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE TO ORDER

A RESPONSE TO THE PETITION

Petitioner is a person involuntarily committed to state

custody pursuant to California’s Sexually Violent Predator’s Act

(SVPA) who is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a

petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

The matter was referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rules 302 and 304. 

On November 15, 2012, the Magistrate Judge filed findings

and recommendations to dismiss Petitioner’s first through fourth

claims without leave to amend as state law claims not cognizable

in a proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, and to refer the

matter back to the Magistrate Judge to direct the filing of a

1

Case 1:12-cv-01163-AWI-SKO Document 14 Filed 01/08/13 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

response to the remaining claim in the petition. The findings

and recommendations were served by mail on Petitioner on the same

date. The findings and recommendations informed Petitioner that

objections were due within thirty days of service. 

Although the deadline for filing objections has passed, no

objections have been filed. 

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. 

The undersigned has carefully reviewed the entire file. The

Court finds that the report and recommendations are supported by

the record and proper analysis.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:

1) The findings and recommendations filed on November 15,

2012, are ADOPTED in full; and

2) Petitioner’s first through fourth claims are DISMISSED

without leave to amend; and

3) The matter is REFERRED back to the Magistrate Judge to

direct the filing of a response to the remaining claim in the

petition. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: January 7, 2013 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2

Case 1:12-cv-01163-AWI-SKO Document 14 Filed 01/08/13 Page 2 of 2