(HC) Rose v. Sisto, No. 2:2008cv03012 - Document 25 (E.D. Cal. 2010)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING in full 19 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 4/8/10: The court's March 17, 2010 order is vacated, and judgment entered on March 17, 2010, is vacated. Respondent's March 27, 2009 motion to dismiss the pending habeas petition as unexhausted is granted. Petitioner's September 28, 2009 motion for declaratory and injunctive relief is denied. This action is dismissed without prejudice. (Kaminski, H)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(HC) Rose v. Sisto Doc. 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 STEVEN W. ROSE, 11 12 13 14 15 16 Petitioner, No. CIV S-08-3012 MCE DAD P Respondent. ORDER vs. D.K. SISTO, / On March 17, 2010, the court adopted in full the magistrate judge’s findings and 17 recommendations, filed February 12, 2010, recommending that respondent’s March 27, 2009 18 motion to dismiss the habeas petition as unexhausted be granted, and that petitioner’s September 19 28, 2009 motion for declaratory and injunctive relief be denied. The habeas action was 20 dismissed and judgment was entered. Although the court conducted a de novo review, having 21 construed petitioner’s March 8, 2010 motion for an extension of time as objections to the 22 findings and recommendations, petitioner has filed late objections to the findings and 23 recommendations. In the interest of justice, the court will vacate the March 17, 2010 order and 24 vacate the judgment entered on March 17, 2010. 25 26 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 file and petitioner’s objections to the findings and recommendations, the court finds the findings 2 and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The court’s March 17, 2010 order (Doc. No. 22) is vacated, and judgment 5 entered on March 17, 2010, is vacated; 6 7 2. The findings and recommendations filed February 12, 2010, are adopted in full; 8 9 3. Respondent’s March 27, 2009 motion to dismiss the pending habeas petition as unexhausted is granted; 10 11 12 13 4. Petitioner’s September 28, 2009 motion for declaratory and injunctive relief is denied; and 5. This action is dismissed without prejudice. Dated: April 8, 2010 14 15 16 ________________________________ MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
