United States District Court, N.D. California
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
M. RYU, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2254 claiming that his constitutional rights were
violated in connection with a May 27, 2015 decision by the
California Board of Parole Hearings (“Board”)
denying him parole. He paid the full filing fee.
action has been assigned to the undersigned magistrate judge.
to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), with written consent of all
parties, a magistrate judge may conduct all proceedings in a
case, including entry of judgment. Appeal will be directly to
the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(3).
17, 2015, Petitioner consented to magistrate judge
jurisdiction in this matter. Dkt. 6.
November 9, 2016, the court dismissed the petition with leave
to amend, noting several deficiencies within the petition
that prevented this action from proceeding. Dkt. 9.
December 8, 2016, Petitioner filed an amended petition, as
directed. Dkt. 10.
reasons outlined below, the court DISMISSES the instant
Standard of Review
court may entertain a petition for writ of habeas corpus
“in behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the
judgment of a state court only on the ground that he is in
custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties
of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a);
Rose v. Hodges, 423 U.S. 19, 21 (1975).
district court shall “award the writ or issue an order
directing the respondent to show cause why the writ should
not be granted, unless it appears from the application that
the applicant or person detained is not entitled
thereto.” 28 U.S.C. § 2243.
Review of ...