Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00828/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00828-6/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 ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO STAY AND APPLICATION FOR WRIT - 1

2:04-CV-0828-RRB-CMK-P

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

No. 2:04-CV-0828-RRB-CMK-P

ORDER

Petitioner Jabar Hally (“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 December 14, 2006, Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison filed

Findings & Recommendations (Docket 20) herein, which were served on all

parties, and which contained notice to all parties that any objections

to the same were to be filed within 20 days. Petitioner filed objections

to the findings and recommendations at Docket 31, despite being denied

a third request for an extension of time to do so. See Docket 28.

JABAR HALLY,

Petitioner,

vs.

A.K. SCRIBNER, Warden,

Respondent.

Case 2:04-cv-00828-RRB-CMK Document 37 Filed 04/02/07 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 ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO STAY AND APPLICATION FOR WRIT - 2

2:04-CV-0828-RRB-CMK-P

On March 15, 2007, Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison filed a

second set of Findings & Recommendations (Docket 30) herein, which were

served on all parties, and which contained notice to all parties that any

objections to the same were to be filed within 10 days. Petitioner filed

objections to these findings and recommendations at Docket 34.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C)

and Local Rule 72-304, the Court has conducted a de novo review of this

case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds: (1)

the Findings and Recommendations filed on December 14, 2006, at Docket

20; and (2) the Findings and Recommendations filed on March 15, 2007, at

Docket 30, to be supported by the record and proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings & Recommendations at Docket 20, filed on

December 14, 2006, are adopted in full;

2. The Findings & Recommendations at Docket 30, filed on

March 15, 2007, are adopted in full;

3. Petitioner’s Motion to Stay at Docket 26 is DENIED; and

4. Petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus is

DENIED.

ENTERED this 30th day of March 2007.

S/RALPH R. BEISTLINE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-00828-RRB-CMK Document 37 Filed 04/02/07 Page 2 of 2