(HC) Franklin v. Knowles, No. 2:2008cv01358 - Document 24 (E.D. Cal. 2009)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING in full 20 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS, signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 1/20/09. Respondent's 8/26/08, motion to dismiss 13 is GRANTED on grounds that the claims are barred by the statute of limitations.CASE CLOSED (Kastilahn, A)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(HC) Franklin v. Knowles Doc. 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ROBERT DUANE FRANKLIN, 12 Petitioner, 13 14 No. 2:08-cv-01358-MCE-GGH P vs. ORDER M. KNOWLES, et al., 15 Respondents. 16 / 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this application for a writ of 18 habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States 19 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local General Order No. 262. 20 On December 1, 2008, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 21 which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to 22 the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Petitioner has filed 23 objections to the findings and recommendations. 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72-304, 2 this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, 3 the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper 4 analysis. 5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 6 1. The findings and recommendations filed December 1, 2008, are adopted in full; and 7 2. Respondent’s August 26, 2008, motion to dismiss (Docket No. 13) is granted on 8 9 grounds that the claims are barred by the statute of limitations. Dated: January 20, 2009 10 11 12 ________________________________ MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 13 14 15 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.
