Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-01558/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-01558-10/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 ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S PENDING MOTIONS - 1

2:03-CV-1558-RRB-JFM-P

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

No. 2:03-CV-1558-RRB-JFM-P

ORDER

Petitioner Raymond H. Denton, Jr. (“Petitioner”), a state

prisoner filing pro se, has filed this application for a writ or

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 General Order No. 262.

On October 11, 2007, Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds

filed Findings & Recommendations (Docket 57) herein, which were

served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties

that any objections to the same were to be filed within twenty

RAYMOND H. DENTON, JR.,

Petitioner,

vs.

SILVIA GARCIA, Warden,

Respondent.

Case 2:03-cv-01558-RRB -JFM Document 68 Filed 12/18/07 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

1 With his objections, Petitioner filed a Motion for DNA

Testing at Docket 62. The Motion is DENIED. Indeed, the Court

finds the motion to be non-responsive given the scope of the

Magistrate’s Findings and Recommendations at Docket 57; and,

untimely.

ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S PENDING MOTIONS - 2

2:03-CV-1558-RRB-JFM-P

days. Plaintiff has filed objections to the findings and

recommendations at Docket 61.1

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72-304, the 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.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations at Docket 57, filed

on October 11, 2007, are adopted in full; 

2. Petitioner’s Motion for DNA Testing at Docket 62, as

well as any and/or all remaining motion(s), is/are DENIED; and 

3. Petitioner’s application for writ of habeas corpus

is DENIED.

Consequently, this matter is now CLOSED and he Clerk of

Court is kindly requested to proceed accordingly.

ENTERED this 17th day of December, 2007.

S/RALPH R. BEISTLINE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:03-cv-01558-RRB -JFM Document 68 Filed 12/18/07 Page 2 of 2