(HC) Owens v. Roe, No. 1:2003cv05327 - Document 92 (E.D. Cal. 2009)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 87 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; ORDER DENYING 77 Reques to Entertain Limited Remand; ORDER DENYING 80 Motion to Remand, signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 12/2/2009. (Sondheim, M)

Download PDF
(HC) Owens v. Roe Doc. 92 1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 CURTIS OWENS, 7 Petitioner, 8 9 v. 10 E. ROE, 11 Respondent. 12 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1:03-cv-05327-LJO-BAK-SMS HC ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION (Doc. 87) ORDER DENYING REQUEST TO ENTERTAIN LIMITED REMAND (Doc. 77) ORDER DENYING MOTION TO REMAND (Doc. 80) 13 14 Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus 15 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On April 20, 2007, the Court entered judgment denying the petition 16 on its merits. (Doc. 54). 17 Subsequently, on appeal, Petitioner's counsel filed a Request to Entertain Limited Remand 18 and a Motion to Remand. (Docs. 77 & 80). On October 30, 2009, the Magistrate Judge assigned to 19 the case filed a Findings and Recommendations recommending that both motions be denied. (Doc. 20 87). The Findings and Recommendations was served on all parties and contained notice that any 21 objections were to be filed within twenty days from the date of service of that order. On November 22 19, 2009, Petitioner filed objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations. 23 (Doc. 90). 24 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a de 25 novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including Petitioner's objections, 26 the Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation is supported by the 27 record and proper analysis. Petitioner's objections present no grounds for questioning the Magistrate 28 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Judge's analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The Findings and Recommendation issued October 30, 2009 (Doc. 87), is ADOPTED IN 3 FULL; 4 2. Petitioner's Request to Entertain Limited Remand (Doc. 77), and Motion to Remand (Doc. 5 80), are DENIED. 6 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 Dated: b9ed48 December 2, 2009 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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.