Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_98-cv-01580/USCOURTS-caed-2_98-cv-01580-3/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

 The amended findings and recommendations superseded findings and recommendations

filed on May 10, 2005 and vacated by the magistrate judge in his July 8, 2005 findings and

recommendations.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN MONTUE,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-98-1580 LKK JFM P 

vs.

G. A. MUELLER, et al.,

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a motion pursuant to Fed.

R. Civ. P. 60(b) for reconsideration of the judgment entered in this action on March 16, 2001

denying on the merits his 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 July 8, 2005, the magistrate judge filed amended findings and

recommendations1 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

Case 2:98-cv-01580-LKK -JFM Document 108 Filed 08/24/05 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

 Petitioner has included with his objections a request for release on his own

recognizance or on bail during the pendency of this action. For the reasons set forth in the

magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations, petitioner’s habeas corpus application must be

dismissed without prejudice. A fortiori, his request for release on bail will be denied.

2

days. On July 20, 2005, petitioner filed objections to the findings and recommendations, and on

July 22, 2005 and July 29, 2005, petitioner filed amended objections to the findings and

recommendations.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 July 8, 2005, are adopted in full;

2. Petitioner’s request for release on his own recognizance or reasonable bail is

denied; and

3. Petitioner’ February 1, 2005 Rule 60(b) motion for reconsideration is

construed as a second or successive habeas corpus application and, so construed, dismissed

because the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has denied petitioner

authorization to proceed with such second or successive petition application. 

DATED: August 23, 2005.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

/mont1580.60bjo

Case 2:98-cv-01580-LKK -JFM Document 108 Filed 08/24/05 Page 2 of 2