Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-01597/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-01597-1/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TERROLD EVERETT SWANSON,

Petitioner,

vs.

SYLVIA GARCIA,

Respondent.

Case No. 2:03-cv-01597 (JKS)

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 May 23, 2007, 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, with particular attention to those portions relevant or pertinent to the objections raised, the

Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper

analysis. 

Petitioner’s objections essentially raise one point. He alleges his trial counsel was

ineffective when he failed to timely move for a mistrial after the improper introduction of evidence

that Petitioner had been in jail. The trial judge equivocated as to whether he would have granted a

Case 2:03-cv-01597-JKS-DAD Document 34 Filed 12/10/07 Page 1 of 2
ORDER

2

timely motion, and denied the untimely motion for a mistrial. Petitioner insists that the trial judge’s

equivocation proves unequivocally the existence of prejudice because it demonstrates lack of

confidence in the outcome. The magistrate was correct in concluding that the trial judge’s

equivocation does not provide evidence of how the motion would have been ruled upon. The state

court’s opinion that it was reasonably probable a timely motion would have been denied because the

offending statement was so brief and innocuous is not contrary to, or an unreasonable application of,

federal law. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed May 23, 2007, are adopted in full; and

2. Petitioner's application for writ of habeas corpus is denied.

Dated this the 7th day of December 2007.

 /s/ James K. Singleton, Jr. 

JAMES K. SINGLETON, JR. 

United States District Judge 

Case 2:03-cv-01597-JKS-DAD Document 34 Filed 12/10/07 Page 2 of 2