(HC) Warren v. Sherman et al, No. 1:2019cv01007 - Document 9 (E.D. Cal. 2019)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 8 Findings and Recommendations, Dismissing Habeas Petition without Prejudice signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 12/04/2019. CASE CLOSED. (Flores, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 OMAR WARREN, 12 Petitioner, 13 14 No. 1:19-cv-01007-DAD-JLT (HC) v. STU SHERMAN, et al., 15 Respondents. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING HABEAS PETITION WITHOUT PREJUDICE (Doc. No. 8) 16 17 Petitioner Omar Warren is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a 18 19 petition for writ of habeas corpus. (Doc. No. 1.) After conducting a preliminary review of the 20 petition, the assigned magistrate judge found that the petitioner had not exhausted his claims by 21 first presenting them to the state’s highest court and may have filed his habeas petition in the 22 wrong court.1 (Doc. No. 5.) Accordingly, petitioner was ordered to show cause as to why the 23 pending petition should not be dismissed due to his failure to exhaust his claims. Petitioner filed a response in which he stated that he had made a mistake in filing the 24 25 habeas petition in federal court and asked to “recall” the petition. (Doc. No. 6.) Accordingly, on 26 October 8, 2019, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations, 27 28 1 The petition for writ of habeas corpus is captioned for filing in the Fresno County Superior Court. (Doc. No. 1.) 1 1 recommending dismissal of the petition. (Doc. No. 8.) Those findings and recommendation were 2 served upon all parties and contained notice that any objections were to be filed within ten (10) 3 days from the date of service of that order. No objections have been filed and the time in which 4 to do so has now passed. 5 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), the court has conducted a 6 de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court concludes that the 7 findings and recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. 8 Accordingly: 9 1. 10 11 adopted; 2. 12 13 14 15 The findings and recommendations, filed October 8, 2019 (Doc. No. 8), are The petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. No. 1) is dismissed without prejudice; and 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close the case. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: December 4, 2019 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.