(HC) Phillips v. Salinas, No. 2:2009cv03554 - Document 18 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 3/28/2011 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 are ADOPTED in FULL; Respondent's 11 motion to dismiss petitioner's ex post facto claim is GRANTED; within 60 days of this order, respondent shall file an answer to petitioner's remaining claim that the Board's 2008 denial of parole violated his right to due process. (Reader, L)

Download PDF
(HC) Phillips v. Salinas Doc. 18 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 PHILLIP W. PHILLIPS, 11 12 13 14 Petitioner, No. CIV S-09-3554 LKK GGH P Respondent. ORDER vs. S. SALINAS, 15 16 / 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 Rule 302. 19 On September 10, 2010, 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 twenty days. Petitioner 22 has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 23 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 24 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire 25 file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 26 proper analysis. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed September 10, 10, are adopted in full; 3 4 5 6 and 2. Respondent’s March 18, 2010, motion to dismiss petitioner’s ex post facto claim (Docket No. 11) is granted. 3. Within 60 days of this order, respondent shall file an answer to petitioner’s 7 remaining claim that the Board’s 2008 denial of parole violated his right to due process. 8 DATED: March 28, 2011. 9 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.