IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
January 23, 2009
DOUGLAS RANDALL CARYLE, PETITIONER,
JOHN MARSHALL, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Garland E. Burrell, Jr. United States District Judge
Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local General Order No. 262.
On December 5, 2008, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. January 5, 2009, petitioner filed his objections as well as a request for extension of time to file his objections. Good cause appearing, his objections are deemed timely filed.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72-304, 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. Petitioner's January 5, 2009, request for an extension of time (Docket No. 13) is granted; petitioner's objections are deemed timely filed;
2. The findings and recommendations filed December 5, 2008, are adopted in full; and
3. Respondent's September 3, 2008, motion to dismiss (Docket No. 7) is granted.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.