From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kirkpatrick v. Muniz

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 26, 2018
No. CV 17-8917-CAS (AGR) (C.D. Cal. Jul. 26, 2018)

Opinion

No. CV 17-8917-CAS (AGR)

07-26-2018

AARON KIRKPATRICK, Petitioner, v. W.L. MUNIZ, Warden, Respondent.


ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the entire file de novo, including the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation. No objections to the Report have been filed. The Court agrees with the recommendation of the magistrate judge.

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner's motion for stay is denied. If Petitioner elects to file a First Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus containing all of his grounds for relief, he must do so within 30 days after the entry of this order. This Court expresses no opinion as to the timeliness or untimeliness of either the original Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus or any First Amended Petition. / / /

If Petitioner does not file a First Amended Petition within 30 days after entry of this order, the case shall proceed on the basis of the existing Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus.

The case is referred back to Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. DATED: 7/26/2018

/s/_________

CHRISTINA A. SNYDER

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Kirkpatrick v. Muniz

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 26, 2018
No. CV 17-8917-CAS (AGR) (C.D. Cal. Jul. 26, 2018)
Case details for

Kirkpatrick v. Muniz

Case Details

Full title:AARON KIRKPATRICK, Petitioner, v. W.L. MUNIZ, Warden, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jul 26, 2018

Citations

No. CV 17-8917-CAS (AGR) (C.D. Cal. Jul. 26, 2018)