From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Crawford v. Biter

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 12, 2012
NO. CV 11-10352 JAK (SS) (C.D. Cal. Apr. 12, 2012)

Opinion

NO. CV 11-10352 JAK (SS)

04-12-2012

BRANDON CRAWFORD, Petitioner, v. MARTIN BITER, Acting Warden, Respondent.


ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS,

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed Respondent's Motion to Dismiss, all the records and files herein, and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. The time for filing Objections to the Report and Recommendation has passed and no Objections have been received. Accordingly, the Court accepts the findings, conclusions and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge.

IT IS ORDERED that Respondent's Motion to Dismiss is denied and Respondent shall file an answer to the Petition within 30 days.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk serve copies of this Order on Petitioner and counsel for Respondent.

________________

JOHN A. KRONSTADT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Crawford v. Biter

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 12, 2012
NO. CV 11-10352 JAK (SS) (C.D. Cal. Apr. 12, 2012)
Case details for

Crawford v. Biter

Case Details

Full title:BRANDON CRAWFORD, Petitioner, v. MARTIN BITER, Acting Warden, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Apr 12, 2012

Citations

NO. CV 11-10352 JAK (SS) (C.D. Cal. Apr. 12, 2012)

Citing Cases

Davis v. Malfi

) Unlike in Cross, the CSC's denial of the June 20, 2004, habeas petition did not rely only on Swain and…

Davis v. Malfi

) Unlike in Cross, the CSC's denial of the June 20, 2004, habeas petition did not rely only on Swain and…