(HC) Jones v. Sullivan

Filing 6

ORDER ADOPTING 5 Findings and Recommendations and CONVERTING Petition to a Civil Rights Action signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 10/9/2019. (Sant Agata, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 WILLIAM J. JONES, 12 13 14 15 No. 1:19-cv-00477-DAD-JDP Petitioner, v. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONVERTING PETITION TO A CIVIL RIGHTS ACTION WARDEN, Respondent. (Doc. No. 5) 16 17 18 Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus 19 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge 20 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 On April 17, 2019, the assigned magistrate judge issued an order to show cause as to why 22 the case should not be summarily dismissed. (Doc. No. 2.) In it, the magistrate judge noted that 23 although the petition was labeled as a writ of habeas corpus under § 2254, it did not challenge 24 petitioner’s underlying criminal conviction or sentence. Instead, petitioner alleged in his writ that 25 his confinement in a cell with another inmate amounted to deliberate indifference. Recognizing 26 that the petitioner may instead be attempting to state a claim for violation of his civil rights under 27 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the magistrate judge permitted petitioner to file a complaint under § 1983. (Id. 28 at 3.) Petitioner did so on June 17, 2019. (Doc. No. 3.) Accordingly, on July 15, 2019, the 1 1 assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, recommending that petitioner’s 2 habeas petition be converted to a civil rights case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. No. 5.) The 3 findings and recommendations were served on petitioner and contained notice that any objections 4 were to be filed within fourteen days after service. (Id. at 2–3.) To date, no objections to the 5 findings and recommendations have been filed, and the time in which to do so has now passed. 6 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the court has conducted a 7 de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings 8 and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis. 9 10 Accordingly, 1. 11 12 adopted in full; 2. 13 14 17 18 The clerk is directed to convert this case into a civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, under the complaint filed on June 17, 2019 (Doc. No. 3); and 3. 15 16 The findings and recommendations issued on July 15, 2019 (Doc. No. 5) are The matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 9, 2019 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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?