From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hodge v. Carey

United States District Court, E.D. California
Aug 24, 2006
No. 2:06-cv-1553-MCE-DAD-P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2006)

Opinion

No. 2:06-cv-1553-MCE-DAD-P.

August 24, 2006


ORDER


Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this 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 July 24, 2006, 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 and a request for a stay of these proceedings.

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. Petitioner's July 31, 2006 request for stay of proceedings is denied;

2. The findings and recommendations filed July 24, 2006, are adopted in full; and

3. This action is dismissed without prejudice.


Summaries of

Hodge v. Carey

United States District Court, E.D. California
Aug 24, 2006
No. 2:06-cv-1553-MCE-DAD-P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2006)
Case details for

Hodge v. Carey

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM RAYMOND HODGE, Petitioner, v. TOM L. CAREY, et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Aug 24, 2006

Citations

No. 2:06-cv-1553-MCE-DAD-P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2006)