Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00098/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00098-4/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Gloria Henry
Respondent
Debbie Ann Lowe
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

DEBBIE ANN LOWE, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

)

v. )

)

)

GLORIA HENRY, Warden, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:05-CV-0098 REC LJO HC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATION 

[Doc. #19]

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR WRIT

OF HABEAS CORPUS

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 16, 2005, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and Recommendation that

recommended Respondent’s motion to dismiss be GRANTED and the petition for writ of habeas

corpus be DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to comply with 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)’s one-year

statute of limitations and 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)’s proscription against successive petitions. This

Findings and Recommendation was served on all parties and contained notice that any objections to

the Findings and Recommendation were to be filed within thirty (30) days of the date of service of

the order. Over thirty (30) days have passed and no party has filed objections.

Case 1:05-cv-00098-REC-LJO Document 20 Filed 12/30/05 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

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, the Court finds that the Findings

and Recommendation is supported by the record and proper analysis. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendation issued November 16, 2005, 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 the Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment for Respondent.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 29, 2005 /s/ Robert E. Coyle 

668554 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00098-REC-LJO Document 20 Filed 12/30/05 Page 2 of 2