Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-02111/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-02111-3/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Fred Foulk
Respondent
Kaseem J. Winn
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 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

KASEEM J. WINN, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

FRED FOULK, 

Respondent. 

No. 2:13-cv-2111 KJM AC P 

ORDER 

 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding with counsel, has filed this application for a writ of 

habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 

Judge as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 

 On February 18, 2015, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which 

were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the 

findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Petitioner has filed 

objections to the findings and recommendations. 

 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 

court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having reviewed the file, the court finds the 

findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis. The 

court writes separately to emphasize that although the magistrate judge specifically noted the 

absence of evidence to support petitioner’s assertions of mental illness, see ECF No. 19 at 7, 

Case 2:13-cv-02111-KJM-AC Document 21 Filed 03/20/15 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 

2

petitioner still has not presented evidence to support those assertions. Similarly, petitioner’s 

objections do not specifically address his mental status during the period between the time his 

conviction became final and the filing of this action despite the magistrate judge’s findings 

concerning the relevance of this time period and the absence of such information from the record. 

Cf. ECF No. 19 at 7. 

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

 1. The findings and recommendations filed February 18, 2015 (ECF No. 19), are adopted 

in full; 

 2. Petitioner’s request for a stay (ECF No. 16) is denied; 

3. Respondent’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 10) is granted; and 

4. Petitioner is directed to file an amended petition, including exhausted claims only, 

within 28 days of service of this order. Should petitioner fail to file an amended and fully 

exhausted petition, the claims identified in the findings and recommendations as unexhausted 

(ECF No. 19) will be stricken and those portions of the petition disregarded for all purposes. The 

case will then proceed on the basis of the petition as amended by operation of this order. 

DATED: March 20, 2015

Case 2:13-cv-02111-KJM-AC Document 21 Filed 03/20/15 Page 2 of 2