From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

DeVaughn v. Cooley

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California, Western Division
Jan 29, 2009
CV 08-7972-TJH (SH) (C.D. Cal. Jan. 29, 2009)

Opinion


MICHAEL O. DEVAUGHN, v. STEVE COOLEY (District Attorney), Respondent. No. CV 08-7972-TJH (SH) United States District Court, C.D. California, Western Division. January 29, 2009

          ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

          TERRY J. HATTER Jr., District Judge.

         Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(b)(1)(C), the Court has reviewed the Petition, all of the records and files herein and the attached Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, and has made a de novo determination of the Report and Recommendation. The Court concurs with and adopts the conclusions of the Magistrate Judge.

         IT IS ORDERED that the Petition filed herein is denied and the action is dismissed without prejudice.

         IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall serve copies of this Order, the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation and the Judgment herein by the United States mail on Petitioner.

         LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.


Summaries of

DeVaughn v. Cooley

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California, Western Division
Jan 29, 2009
CV 08-7972-TJH (SH) (C.D. Cal. Jan. 29, 2009)
Case details for

DeVaughn v. Cooley

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL O. DEVAUGHN, v. STEVE COOLEY (District Attorney), Respondent.

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California, Western Division

Date published: Jan 29, 2009

Citations

CV 08-7972-TJH (SH) (C.D. Cal. Jan. 29, 2009)

Citing Cases

Hernandez v. People

See 28 U.S.C. §§ 2242, 2243; Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 434-35 (2004) (the custodian is “the person…

Griffin v. L. A. Sheriffs Cnty. Jail

Where a state pretrial detainee brings a federal habeas petition, the Sheriff is the proper respondent.…