Andris v. Barnes
Filing
10
ORDER ADOPTING 9 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS, in full, signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 9/7/2011. Petitioner's 3 Motion to Stay is GRANTED and he shall inform Court w/in 21 days of completion of exhaustion in state courts. (Marciel, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
SEONJUAN ANDRIS,
Petitioner,
11
vs.
12
13
No. Civ. S-11-0758 KJM KJN P
WARDEN BARNES,
Respondent.
14
ORDER
/
15
Petitioner, 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 as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On June 10, 2011, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations,
19
20
which were served on petitioner and which contained notice to petitioner that any objections to
21
the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. No objections to the
22
findings and recommendations have been filed.
The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United
23
24
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 20, 2011, are adopted in full;
5
and
6
2. Petitioner’s motion to stay (ECF No. 3) is granted; petitioner shall inform the
7
court within twenty-one days of the completion of exhaustion in the state courts.
8
DATED: September 7, 2011.
9
10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
/and0758.jo.stay
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?