Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00318/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00318-5/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
M. S. Evans
Respondent
Angel Morales Hernandez
Petitioner

Document Text:

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

ANGEL MORALES HERNANDEZ, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

)

v. )

)

)

M. S. EVANS, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:06-CV-00318 OWW LJO HC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATION

[Doc. #16]

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 November 2, 2006, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendation that

recommended Respondent’s motion to dismiss be GRANTED and the petition be DISMISSED for

violating the one-year statute of limitations. 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 ten (10) days of the date of

service of the order. 

On November 21, 2006, Petitioner filed objections to the Findings and Recommendation.

Case 1:06-cv-00318-OWW -LJO Document 18 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

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. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendation issued November 2, 2006, is ADOPTED IN FULL; 

2. Respondent’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED;

3. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED with prejudice; and

4. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 1, 2006 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00318-OWW -LJO Document 18 Filed 12/04/06 Page 2 of 2