Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Humphrey v. Curry

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


February 11, 2009

JULIUS D. HUMPHREY, SR., PETITIONER,
v.
B. CURRY, RESPONDENT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Oliver W. Wanger United States District Court

CORRECTED ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RE MOTION TO DISMISS CORPUS (DOC. 9, 16) AND PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS REOPENING CASE.

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for 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 Rule 72-302.

On February 11, 2008, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations, recommending that Respondent's motion to dismiss the petition be granted in part and denied in part. Doc. 16. Specifically, the Magistrate recommended that the case be ordered to proceed on grounds 5 and 6 only. Id. Dismissal of all other claims was recommended on the ground that petitioner failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. Id.

The findings and recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice to the parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within thirty days. No objections were filed.

On March 17, 2008, the district court issued an order adopting the Magistrate's findings and recommendations in full. Doc. 17. However, due to an administrative error, the order indicated that the petition should be dismissed in its entirety. Id.

Accordingly, the district court issues the following corrected order:

1. The findings and recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on February 11, 2008 are adopted in full.

2. Respondent's motion to dismiss the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. This case shall proceed on grounds 5 and 6 only.

SO ORDERED

20090211

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.