(HC) Moten v. Kavanaugh, No. 1:2008cv01121 - Document 12 (E.D. Cal. 2009)

Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 2/4/2009 ADOPTING 10 Findings and Recommendations; DISMISSING Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and DIRECTING Judgment be entered for Respondent. No Certificate of Appealability is required. CASE CLOSED. (Lundstrom, T)

Download PDF
(HC) Moten v. Kavanaugh Doc. 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 JESSE T. MOTEN, 9 Petitioner, 10 v. 11 J. KAVANAUGH, 12 Respondent. 13 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1:08-cv-01121 LJO-TAG (HC) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. 10) ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS (Doc. 1) ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO ENTER JUDGMENT 14 15 16 Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 17 On October 15, 2008, the Magistrate Judge assigned to the case filed Findings and 18 Recommendations recommending that the petition for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed because 19 the petition does not allege grounds that would entitle Petitioner to habeas corpus relief. (Doc. 10). 20 The Findings and Recommendations were served on Petitioner 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 10, 2008, Petitioner filed objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations. 23 (Doc. 11). 24 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a 25 de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including Petitioner's 26 objections, the Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations are 27 supported by the record and proper analysis. Petitioner's objections present no grounds for 28 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 questioning the Magistrate Judge's analysis. 2 ORDER 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The Findings and Recommendations filed October 15, 2008 (Doc. 10), are ADOPTED IN 5 FULL; 6 2. The petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED; and 7 3. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to ENTER JUDGMENT for Respondent and close the 8 file. 9 This order terminates the action in its entirety. Because Petitioner is challenging an 10 administrative order of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation after a prison 11 disciplinary hearing that did not result in the loss of any credits, no certificate of appealability is 12 required. White v. Lambert, 370 F.3d 1002, 1010 (9th Cir. 2004); see 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A). 13 14 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. 16 Dated: b9ed48 February 4, 2009 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.