From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kershaw v. Evans

United States District Court, E.D. California
Aug 23, 2007
No. CIV S-06-1430 FCD GGH P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 23, 2007)

Opinion

No. CIV S-06-1430 FCD GGH P.

August 23, 2007


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 August 16, 2007, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Although the time for filing objections has not expired, respondent has expressly elected not to file objections (docket entry # 19), instead seeking to be allowed 90 days to file an answer.

The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge's analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed August 16, 2007, are adopted in full; and

2. Respondent's October 6, 2006, motion to dismiss the petition as barred by the AEDPA one-year statute of limitations is denied;

3. Respondent is directed to file an answer within 90 days of the filed date of this order; and petitioner's traverse is due 30 days thereafter.


Summaries of

Kershaw v. Evans

United States District Court, E.D. California
Aug 23, 2007
No. CIV S-06-1430 FCD GGH P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 23, 2007)
Case details for

Kershaw v. Evans

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL UPTON KERSHAW, Petitioner, v. MIKE EVANS, Warden, et al.…

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

Date published: Aug 23, 2007

Citations

No. CIV S-06-1430 FCD GGH P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 23, 2007)