Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00512/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00512-1/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

LOUIE MARTY,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-06-0512 FCD DAD P

vs.

MICHAEL B. McPARTLAND,

Respondent. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a second amended petition

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 November 13, 2006, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations

herein which were served on petitioner and which contained notice to petitioner that any

objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Petitioner

has filed objections to the findings and recommendations; however, he also requests an

additional sixty-days to conduct further research for his objections and an order granting him

preferred legal user status to access the law library. The petitioner’s requests will be denied as

unnecessary.

/////

Case 2:06-cv-00512-FCD-DAD Document 10 Filed 12/04/06 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

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 and

by proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed November 13, 2006, are adopted in

full; 

2. Petitioner’s second amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus, filed on

October 10, 2006, is dismissed as untimely and as successive pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2244 (d)

and 2244(b)(3); and 

3. This action is dismissed.

DATED: December 4, 2006.

Case 2:06-cv-00512-FCD-DAD Document 10 Filed 12/04/06 Page 2 of 2