Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_02-cv-01266/USCOURTS-caed-2_02-cv-01266-1/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

 On March 3, 2005, petitioner filed a request for a copy of the findings and 1

recommendations. On March 10, 2005, the court granted his request. However, on March 9,

2005, petitioner filed objections to the findings and recommendations, indicating that, despite his

March 3, 2005 request, he was served with a copy. 

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WAYLAND KIRKLAND,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-02-1266 DFL CMK P

vs.

D.K. BUTLER, 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 February 18, 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 twenty days. Petitioner 1

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-

Case 2:02-cv-01266-JAM-CMK Document 89 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

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.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed February 18, 2005, are adopted in

full; and

2. Petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus is dismissed for failure to

exhaust state remedies.

DATED: 9/26/2005

DAVID F. LEVI

United States District Judge

Case 2:02-cv-01266-JAM-CMK Document 89 Filed 09/26/05 Page 2 of 2