(HC) Steppe v. Attorney General for the State of California, No. 2:2008cv03020 - Document 12 (E.D. Cal. 2009)

Court Description: ORDER adopting in full 10 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 12/16/09. Petitioners 9 motion to... reconsider, construed as a motion pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b), is DENIED.(Kastilahn, A)

Download PDF
(HC) Steppe v. Attorney General for the State of California Doc. 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 BERNARD STEPPE, 11 12 13 Petitioner, No. CIV S-08-3020 JAM GGH P vs. JERRY BROWN, Attorney General, 14 Respondent. 15 ORDER / 16 Petitioner, a pretrial detainee proceeding pro se, has filed an 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 October 14, 2009, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations 20 herein which were served on petitioner and which contained notice to petitioner that any 21 objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Petitioner 22 has purported to file objections1 to the findings and recommendations. 23 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72- 24 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire 25 1 26 Petitioner’s putative “objections” are an outpouring of unrestrained, irrational and irrelevant vitriol. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 2 proper analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The findings and recommendations filed October 14, 2009, are adopted in full; 5 6 and 2. Petitioner’s March 9, 2009 (docket #9), “motion to ... reconsider,” construed as 7 a motion pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b), is denied. 8 DATED: December 16, 2009 9 /s/ John A. Mendez UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10 11 12 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.