From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rangel v. Mendoza

United States District Court, E.D. California
Apr 13, 2007
1:06-cv-0365-OWW WMW HC (E.D. Cal. Apr. 13, 2007)

Opinion

1:06-cv-0365-OWW WMW HC.

April 13, 2007


ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RE DISMISSAL OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS FOR LACK OF EXHAUSTION [Doc. 9]


Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for 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 Rule 72-302.

On February 20, 2007, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations herein. These findings and recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice to the parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within thirty days. No objections were filed.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on February 20, 2007, are a adopted in full; 2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DISMISSED for lack of exhaustion; 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment for Respondent and to close this case. IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Rangel v. Mendoza

United States District Court, E.D. California
Apr 13, 2007
1:06-cv-0365-OWW WMW HC (E.D. Cal. Apr. 13, 2007)
Case details for

Rangel v. Mendoza

Case Details

Full title:RAMIRO RANGEL, Petitioner, v. KATHY MENDOZA, Warden, Respondent

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

Date published: Apr 13, 2007

Citations

1:06-cv-0365-OWW WMW HC (E.D. Cal. Apr. 13, 2007)