Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00318/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00318-2/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, )

)

Respondents. )

 )

1:06-CV-00318 OWW LJO HC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATION

[Doc. #6]

ORDER DISMISSING GROUND THREE

FROM 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 May 8, 2006, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendation that

recommended Ground Three be DISMISSED from the petition for failure to state a claim cognizable

under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 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 May 30, 2006, Petitioner filed objections to the Findings and Recommendation.

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

Case 1:06-cv-00318-OWW -LJO Document 8 Filed 06/28/06 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

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 May 8, 2006, is ADOPTED IN FULL; 

2. Ground Three of the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DISMISSED; and

3. The matter is REFERRED BACK to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 27, 2006 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00318-OWW -LJO Document 8 Filed 06/28/06 Page 2 of 2