Fordjour v. Jordan, et al.

Filing 21

ORDER VACATING Findings and Recommendations Dated June 8, 2009 10 , signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 4/1/10. (Hellings, J)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 10 11 v. 12 13 14 Respondents. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 U . S . D is t r ic t C o u r t E. D . C a lifo r n ia UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CHARLES FORDJOUR, Petitioner, KINGS COURNTY SHERIFF CHRIS JORDAN, et al., ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1:09-cv-00060 OWW YNP [DLB] (HC) ORDER VACATING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION DATED JUNE 8, 2009. Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and Recommendation (F&R) on June 8, 2009, that recommended the petition be dismissed. (Doc. #10.) Petitioner filed objections to the F&R on July 13, 2009. (Doc. #13.) This Court issued an order adopting the F&R on September 21, 2009. (Doc. #14.) However, the appellate court vacated the order and remanded the matter back to the district court for consideration of Petitioner's objections and a new order regarding the Magistrate Judge's F&R. (Doc. #19.) After considering Petitioner's objections to the F&R, claiming that the Court misunderstood the grounds alleged in the petition, the Court hereby VACATES the June 8, 2009, F&R and will issue new findings and recommendations to the District Court Judge in line with the grounds claimed 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 in the petition for writ of habeas corpus. Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that the Findings and Recommendation issued June 8, 2010 (Doc. #10) are VACATED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 0ce24h April 1, 2010 /s/ Dennis L. Beck UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 U . S . D is t r ic t C o u r t E. D . C a lifo r n ia 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?