Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00279/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00279-3/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Ronald Allen Wimberley
Petitioner
James A. Yates
Respondent

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

RONALD ALLEN WIMBERLEY, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

)

v. )

)

)

JAMES A. YATES, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:06-CV-00279 OWW LJO HC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATION

[Doc. #14]

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 July 26, 2006, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendation that

recommended Respondent’s motion to dismiss the petition be GRANTED for failure to exhaust state

remedies, and the petition be DISMISSED. 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 August 14, 2006, Petitioner filed objections to the Findings and Recommendation.

Case 1:06-cv-00279-OWW -LJO Document 16 Filed 08/28/06 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 July 26, 2006, is ADOPTED IN FULL; 

2. Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED; 

3. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DISMISSED; and

4. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment for respondent and against petitioner.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 25, 2006 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00279-OWW -LJO Document 16 Filed 08/28/06 Page 2 of 2