Rodden v. Warden, Avenal State Prison
Filing
18
ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 7/19/11 ADOPTING 17 Findings and Recommendations in full; DENYING 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. A Certificate of appealability SHALL NOT issue. CASE CLOSED. (Meuleman, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
STEPHEN RODDEN,
12
Petitioner,
13
14
vs.
ORDER
WARDEN, AVENAL STATE PRISON
15
16
2:10-cv-00628-MCE-TJB
Respondent.
________________________________/
Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas
17
18
corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate
19
Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
20
On June 1, 2011, Magistrate Judge Bommer filed findings and recommendations which
21
recommended that the habeas petition be denied. The findings and recommendations was served
22
on all parties and contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and
23
recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. No party filed objections to the
24
findings and recommendations.
25
///
26
///
1
1
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this
2
Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the
3
Court finds the June 1, 2011 findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by
4
proper analysis.
5
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
6
1.
7
The findings and recommendations filed June 1, 2011 (ECF No. 17) are
ADOPTED in full;
8
2.
Petitioner’s petition for writ of habeas corpus is DENIED;
9
3.
A certificate of appealability shall not issue; and
10
4.
The Clerk is directed to close the case.
11
Dated: July 19, 2011
12
________________________________
13
14
MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
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?