Alex Jennings III v. K Santoro, No. 5:2015cv01185 - Document 58 (C.D. Cal. 2017)
Court Description: ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Judge George H. Wu for Report and Recommendation (Issued) 49 (sbu)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Alex Jennings III v. K Santoro Doc. 58 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ) ) Petitioner, ) v. ) ) ) K. STANORO, Warden, ) ) Respondent. _________________________________ ) ALEX JENNINGS III, NO. EDCV 15-1185-GW(KS) ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 17 18 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition for Writ of Habeas 19 Corpus (“Petition”), all of the records herein, the Report and Recommendation of United 20 States Magistrate Judge (“Report”), and Petitioner’s Objections to the Magistrate Judge’s 21 Report and Recommendation (“Objections”). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Fed. 22 R. Civ. P. 72(b), the Court has conducted a de novo review of those portions of the Report to 23 which objections have been stated. Having completed its review, the Court accepts the 24 findings and recommendations set forth in the Report. 25 26 27 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: (1) the Petition is DENIED; and (2) Judgment shall be entered dismissing this action with prejudice. 28 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Further, to the extent Petitioner requests a stay in the Objections, that request is denied 2 because Petitioner’s unexhausted claims are plainly meritless and are denied as such 3 following a de novo review. Cf. Dixon v. Baker, 847 F.3d 714, 720 (9th Cir. 2017) (a stay and 4 abeyance is appropriate when, inter alia, the petitioner’s claims “are not plainly meritless”). 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DATED: March 27, 2017 ________________________________ GEORGE H. WU UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
]]>
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.
