Bell v. Adams
Filing
23
ORDER re 22 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that the application for writ of habeas corpus 1 be denied: Adopted in full; application denied; certificate of appealability shall not issue; Clerk of Court directed to close case. Signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 09/30/11. (Mueller, Kimberly)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
MICHAEL A. BELL,
Plaintiff,
11
vs.
12
13
No. CIV S-08-2281 KJM CHS
DERRAL G. ADAMS,
Respondent.
14
ORDER
/
15
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of
16
17
habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate
18
Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On June 15, 2011, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations,
19
20
which were served on the parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to
21
the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections to the
22
findings and recommendations have been filed..
The court thus presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v.
23
24
United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are
25
reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir.
26
/////
1
1
1983). Having carefully reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to
2
be supported by the record and by the proper analysis.
3
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
4
1. The findings and recommendations filed June 15, 2011, are adopted in full;
5
2. The application for writ of habeas corpus is denied;
6
3. A certificate of appealability shall not issue; and
7
4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to CLOSE this case.
8
DATED: September 30, 2011.
9
10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
/brya2241.805
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?