Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01530/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01530-2/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

27

28

U.S . District Court

 E. D . California cd 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LARRY McCORVEY, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

)

v. )

)

)

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:05-CV-1530 AWI LJO HC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATION

[Doc. #8]

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR WRIT

OF HABEAS CORPUS

[Doc. #1]

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT

TO ENTER JUDGMENT

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

On January 5, 2006, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendation that

recommended the petition be DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to exhaust state remedies. 

The Magistrate Judge further recommended that the Clerk of Court be DIRECTED to enter

judgment. The Findings and Recommendation was served on all parties and contained notice that

any objections were to be filed within thirty (30) days of the date of service of the order. 

On January 20, 2006, Petitioner filed objections to the Findings and Recommendation.

Case 1:05-cv-01530-AWI-LJO Document 10 Filed 03/23/06 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

27

28

U.S . District Court

 E. D . California cd 2

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a de

novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file and having considered the

objections, the Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation is

supported by the record and proper analysis, and there is no need to modify the Findings and

Recommendations based on the points raised in the objections. The court does note that from the

objections it appears that Plaintiff believes this action is proceeding in the Fresno County Superior

Court. Plaintiff is informed that this action has been filed in the United States District Court for the

Eastern District of California. As explained by the Magistrate Judge, Plaintiff must pursue his

remedies with the California courts, including the Fresno County Superior Court, before filing an

action in this court. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendation issued January 5, 2006, is ADOPTED IN FULL; 

2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DISMISSED without prejudice; and

3. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to close this file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 23, 2006 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01530-AWI-LJO Document 10 Filed 03/23/06 Page 2 of 2