Thompson v. Hill
ORDER adopting 18 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 9/15/2016. (Lundstrom, T)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ALLEN C. THOMPSON,
Case No. 1:13-cv-02094-LJO-SKO HC
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
DENIAL OF PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR
RICK HILL, Warden,
Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Court referred the matter to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rules 302 and 304.
On July 8, 2014, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations in which she
recommended that the Court dismiss the petition as untimely. The findings and recommendations,
which were served on the parties on the same date, provided that objections could be served within
thirty days. On August 4, 2014, Petitioner filed objections. On August 27, 2014, after reviewing
Petitioner’s objections, the record as a whole, and applicable law, the Court adopted the findings and
recommendations and granted Respondent’s motion to dismiss the petition. The Clerk of Court
entered judgment for Respondent.
On February 24, 2015, Petitioner filed a document entitled “Objections to Findings and
Recommendations.” Following review of the document, the Magistrate Judge determined that its
substance indicated that Petitioner intended to seek reconsideration of the dismissal of his petition.
Accordingly, the Magistrate Judge ordered that the caption, “Objections to Findings and
Recommendations” be disregarded. The Magistrate Judge then analyzed the document as a motion
for reconsideration and determined that Petitioner alleged no basis by which the Court could grant
Accordingly, on March 16, 2015, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations
recommending that the Court deny the motion for reconsideration. The findings and
recommendations, which were served on the parties on the same date, provided that objections could
be served within thirty days. Neither party filed objections.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), having carefully reviewed the
entire file de novo and considered Petitioner's objections, the Court finds that the findings and
recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis.
Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS that the findings and recommendations filed March
16, 2015, be adopted in full, and the motion for reconsideration be denied. The Court DECLINES to
issue a certificate of appealability.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____
September 15, 2016
UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE
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?