(HC) Sargent v. Martell, No. 2:2008cv03157 - Document 17 (E.D. Cal. 2010)

Court Description: ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 2/26/10 ORDERING the findings and recommendations 14 are ADOPTED IN FULL; respondent's motion to dismiss 12 is GRANTED; petitioner's motion to stay 13 is DENIED; clerk is directed to close case; the Court DECLINES TO ISSUE a Certificate of Appealability; CASE CLOSED. (Carlos, K)

Download PDF
(HC) Sargent v. Martell Doc. 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CORBY SARGENT, 11 12 13 14 Petitioner, vs. MICHAEL MARTHELL, Respondent. 15 16 No. CIV S-08-3157 MCE EFB P ORDER / Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this application for a writ 17 of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States 18 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 19 On December 21, 2009, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations 20 herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any 21 objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. 22 Petitioner has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 23 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 24 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire 25 file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 26 proper analysis. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed December 21, 2009, are adopted in 3 full; 4 2. Respondent’s August 31, 2009 motion to dismiss is granted; 5 3. Petitioner’s September 14, 2009 motion to stay the petition is denied; 6 4. The Clerk is directed to close the case; and 7 5. The court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. 8 Dated: February 26, 2010 9 10 11 ________________________________ MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.