From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rouser v. Lozano

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jun 21, 2022
2:21-cv-0777-KJM-JDP (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jun. 21, 2022)

Opinion

2:21-cv-0777-KJM-JDP (PC)

06-21-2022

WILLIAM ROUSER, Petitioner, v. JARED LOZANO, Respondents.


ORDER

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this application for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On October 25, 2021, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, 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 fourteen days. Petitioner has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having reviewed the 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. The findings and recommendations filed October 25, 2021, are adopted in full;
2. Respondent's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 15) is granted;
3. The petition is dismissed without leave to amend;
4. The court declines to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 U.S.C. § 2253;and
5. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case.


Summaries of

Rouser v. Lozano

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jun 21, 2022
2:21-cv-0777-KJM-JDP (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jun. 21, 2022)
Case details for

Rouser v. Lozano

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM ROUSER, Petitioner, v. JARED LOZANO, Respondents.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jun 21, 2022

Citations

2:21-cv-0777-KJM-JDP (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jun. 21, 2022)