Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01421/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01421-2/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

JASON SCOTT HARPER, )

)

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

)

RODERICK HICKMAN, et al., )

)

)

Respondents. )

)

 )

1:05-cv- 01421-OWW-TAG HC 

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATION (Doc. 7)

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR WRIT

OF HABEAS CORPUS (Doc. 1)

ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO U.S.

DISTRICT COURT FOR CENTRAL DISTRICT

OF CALIFORNIA

On November 10, 2005, Petitioner filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Doc. 1).

On April 3, 2007, the Magistrate Judge assigned to the case filed a Findings and

Recommendation recommending that, with the exception of Ground Two, which alleged

insufficiency of the evidence to support the special circumstance allegation that Petitioner acted

with reckless indifference to human life, all other claims be dismissed for failure to allege

grounds entitling Petitioner to habeas relief. (Doc. 7). The Findings and Recommendation

further recommended that the case then be transferred to the United States District Court for the

Central District of California for further proceedings on Ground Two. (Id.). This Findings and

Case 1:05-cv-01421-OWW -TAG Document 8 Filed 07/30/07 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

Recommendation was served on all parties and contained notice that any objections were to be

filed within thirty days from the date of service of that order. To date, the parties have not filed

timely objections to the Findings and Recommendation.

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 Recommendation is supported by the record and proper

analysis. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendation, filed April 3, 2007 (Doc. 7), is ADOPTED

IN FULL;

2. With the exception of Ground Two, all other claims in the instant petition are

dismissed for failure to state a claim for which habeas relief may be granted (Doc.

1); and,

3. The case is ordered to be TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for

the Central District of California for further proceedings on the remaining ground

for relief. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 27, 2007 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01421-OWW -TAG Document 8 Filed 07/30/07 Page 2 of 2