(HC) Hellon v. Felker et al, No. 2:2007cv01816 - Document 19 (E.D. Cal. 2009)
Court Description: AMENDED ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 4/2/09 ORDERING the findings and recommendations 16 ADOPTED IN FULL; respondents' 12/17/07 motion to dismiss 8 is DENIED; respondents are given 30 days to file an answer to the petition and are directed that any and all transcripts or other documents relevant to the determination of the issues presented in the application. Petitioner is given 30 days after service of an answer to file his reply. (Carlos, K)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(HC) Hellon v. Felker et al Doc. 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JOSHUA MOSES HELLON, 11 Petitioner, 12 vs. 13 No. CIV S-07-1816 LKK EFB P T. FELKER, et al., 14 15 16 Respondents. AMENDED 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 General Order No. 262. 19 On March 12, 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 fourteen days. 22 Respondents objected to the findings and recommendations. On March 31, 2009, the court issued 23 an order adopting the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations in full. However, 24 because of a clerical error the court denied “respondents’ March 3, 2008, motion to dismiss.” In 25 fact, respondents filed their motion to dismiss on December 17, 2007. March 3, 2008, was the 26 date respondents filed a reply to petitioner’s response to the motion to dismiss. The court issues 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 this amended order to rectify that error. 2 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72- 3 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire 4 file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 5 proper analysis. 6 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 7 1. The findings and recommendations filed March 12, 2009, are adopted in full; 8 2. Respondents’ December 17, 2007, motion to dismiss this action as untimely is 9 denied; 10 3. Respondents are given 30 days to file an answer to the petition and are directed 11 that any response shall be accompanied by any and all transcripts or other documents relevant to 12 the determination of the issues presented in the application. See Rules 4, 5, Fed. R. Governing 13 § 2254 Cases; and, 14 15 4. Petitioner is given 30 days after service of an answer to file his reply. DATED: April 2, 2009. 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.
