Smith v. Warden, Mule Creek State Prison

Filing 6

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 1/26/2015 RECOMMENDING that petitioner's 1 petition for a writ of habeas corpus be dismissed ; and this case be closed. Referred to Judge John A. Mendez; Objections due within 14 days. (Yin, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

RODNEY SMITH,

11

Petitioner,

12
13
14

v.

FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

WARDEN, MULE CREEK STATE
PRISON,
Respondent.

15

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas

16
17

No. 2:14-cv-2747 JAM CKD P

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner has paid the filing fee.
In his petition, petitioner asserts he has been denied copies of the transcript of his

18
19

sentencing proceedings as well as a copy of the abstract of judgment. While it is not entirely

20

clear, it appears petitioner wants this court to order a California court to make the documents

21

petitioner seeks available to him.

22

A federal court can entertain an application for writ of habeas corpus filed by a state

23

prisoner only when the state prisoner alleges he is in custody in violation of federal law. 28

24

U.S.C. § 2254(a). Because petitioner’s claim does not concern whether he is in custody in

25

violation of federal law, his petition for writ of habeas corpus must be dismissed.

26

/////

27

/////

28

/////
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that:

2

1. Petitioner’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus be dismissed; and

3

2. This case be closed.

4

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

5

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days

6

after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written

7

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

8

Findings and Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the

9

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951

10

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

11

Dated: January 26, 2015

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18

1
smit2747.dis

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2