Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00924/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00924-5/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

GLENN CAROLE HOLSOME,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-0924 LKK GGH P

vs.

DAVE RUNNELS, Warden, et al.,

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an 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 15, 2006, 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 ten days. Neither party

has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be

supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY

ORDERED that:

/////

Case 2:04-cv-00924-LKK-CHS Document 29 Filed 03/28/06 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

1. The findings and recommendations filed February 15, 2006, are adopted in

full; 

2. Respondent’s August 23, 2005 motion to dismiss that portion of Claim 1

which implicates the constitutionality of California criminal jury instruction (CALJIC) 2.50.02 is

granted on the ground that it is unexhausted; 

3. Respondent’s motion is denied as to any other ground; and

4. This action is stayed pending exhaustion of state court remedies as to the

unexhausted claim; petitioner is directed to file a state court petition within thirty (30) days of the

filed date of this order; petitioner is directed to file a notice of completed exhaustion within thirty

(30) days after ruling by the state supreme court.

DATED: March 28, 2006.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

/hols0924.801

Case 2:04-cv-00924-LKK-CHS Document 29 Filed 03/28/06 Page 2 of 2