From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cooley v. Wofford

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Mar 10, 2014
563 F. App'x 547 (9th Cir. 2014)

Opinion

No. 12-17071 D.C. No. 1:12-cv-01164-LJO

03-10-2014

WILLIE COOLEY, Petitioner - Appellant, v. C. WOFFORD, Respondent - Appellee.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION


MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.


Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Gary S. Austin, Magistrate Judge, Presiding

Before: PREGERSON, LEAVY, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Willie Cooley appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we vacate and remand.

In his order dismissing with prejudice Cooley's habeas petition, the magistrate judge incorrectly stated that Cooley had consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). Because the record reflects that Cooley expressly declined to give such consent, the magistrate judge lacked authority to issue a final order dismissing with prejudice Cooley's habeas petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 636; Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. Accordingly, we vacate the judgment and remand for further proceedings.

In light of this disposition, we do not reach Cooley's contentions regarding the merits of his habeas petition.

VACATED and REMANDED.


Summaries of

Cooley v. Wofford

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Mar 10, 2014
563 F. App'x 547 (9th Cir. 2014)
Case details for

Cooley v. Wofford

Case Details

Full title:WILLIE COOLEY, Petitioner - Appellant, v. C. WOFFORD, Respondent …

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Mar 10, 2014

Citations

563 F. App'x 547 (9th Cir. 2014)