From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brooks v. Horel

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jan 8, 2008
No. CIV S-06-2666 FCD EFB P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 8, 2008)

Opinion

No. CIV S-06-2666 FCD EFB P.

January 8, 2008


ORDER


Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an 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 November 20, 2007, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on petitioner and which contained notice to petitioner that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Petitioner has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

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. The findings and recommendations filed November 20, 2007, are adopted in full; and

2. This action is dismissed on the ground that the petition is second or successive and petitioner has not demonstrated that the Ninth Circuit has granted him leave to file it in this court.


Summaries of

Brooks v. Horel

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jan 8, 2008
No. CIV S-06-2666 FCD EFB P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 8, 2008)
Case details for

Brooks v. Horel

Case Details

Full title:TIMOTHY BRYAN BROOKS, Petitioner, v. ROBERT HOREL, Warden, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Jan 8, 2008

Citations

No. CIV S-06-2666 FCD EFB P (E.D. Cal. Jan. 8, 2008)