Proctor v. Wong, et al

Filing 303

ORDER ADOPTING in Full 226 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS, signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 4/16/09. Petitioner's Rule 56(f) motion 185 and 186 is DENIED. Petitioner's motion for summary judgment 189 is DENIED in its entirety. Respon dents' motion for summary judgment 176 is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART without prejudice, as outlined in the May 15, 2007, f&r's. Claims A, C, D, F, G, H, J, K (to the extent not already dismissed), L, M,N, O, Q, R, and S are DENIED on the merits.(Kastilahn, A)

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 vs. ROBERT L. AYERS, JR., et al., Respondents. / Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding with appointed counsel, seeks a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Eastern District of California local rules. On May 15, 2007, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on the parties and which contained notice that the parties may file objections within a specified time. Timely objections to the findings and recommendations have been filed. /// /// 1 WILLIAM A. PROCTOR, Petitioner, No. CIV S-96-1401-JAM-CMK DEATH PENALTY CASE ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

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 entirety; full;

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The findings and recommendations filed May 15, 2007, are adopted in

2. 3.

Petitioner's Rule 56(f) motion (Docs. 185 and 186) is denied; Petitioner's motion for summary judgment (Doc. 189) is denied in its

4.

Respondents' motion for summary judgment (Doc. 176) is granted in part

and denied in part without prejudice, as outlined in the May 15, 2007, findings and recommendations; and 5. Claims A, C, D, F, G, H, J, K (to the extent not already dismissed), L, M,

N, O, Q, R, and S are denied on the merits. DATED: April 16, 2009

/s/ John A. Mendez UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2