Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_00-cv-01235/USCOURTS-caed-2_00-cv-01235-1/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

RAYMUNDO A. JAIME,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-00-1235 DFL CMK P

vs.

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF

CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Respondents. 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 General Order No. 262.

On April 27, 2005, 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 fifteen 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 72-

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. As to

claims one (sufficiency of the evidence) and three (Berry’s testimony), I find that the state court

Case 2:00-cv-01235-DFL -CMK Document 29 Filed 09/26/05 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

2

of appeal decision was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established

supreme Court precedent. As to the remaining claims, I adopt the analysis in the findings and

recommendations.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed April 27, 2005, are adopted to the

extent stated above; and

2. Petitioner’s petition for writ of habeas corpus is DENIED.

DATED: 9/26/2005

DAVID F. LEVI

United States District Judge

Case 2:00-cv-01235-DFL -CMK Document 29 Filed 09/26/05 Page 2 of 2