Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00020/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00020-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Alex Espinoza
Petitioner
James 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

ALEX ESPINOZA, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

)

v. )

)

)

JAMES YATES, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:06-CV-0020 AWI SMS HC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATION

[Doc. #3]

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR WRIT

OF HABEAS CORPUS

[Doc. #1]

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

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

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 February 10, 2006, Petitioner filed objections to the Findings and Recommendation.

Petitioner states that he has in fact presented a petition for writ of certiorari to the California

Supreme Court, and he has advised the Supreme Court of the instant pending federal action.

Case 1:06-cv-00020-AWI -SMS Document 6 Filed 03/03/06 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

Nevertheless, because the California Supreme Court has not yet rendered a decision on the petition

which is pending before it, the instant petition in unexhausted. Comity requires this federal court

allow the California Supreme Court to review the instant claims before they may be presented here.

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 January 26, 2006, is ADOPTED IN FULL; 

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

3. Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 3, 2006 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00020-AWI -SMS Document 6 Filed 03/03/06 Page 2 of 2