(HC) Anderson v. Sacramento County Human Services, No. 2:2010cv00967 - Document 8 (E.D. Cal. 2010)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 5/12/10 recommending that the 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Brett Anderson be summarily dismissed; REFERRED to Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr.; objections may be filed within 20 days after being served with these F&R's.(Carlos, K)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(HC) Anderson v. Sacramento County Human Services Doc. 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 BRETT ANDERSON, 12 13 14 No. CIV S-10-0967-GEB-CMK-P Petitioner, vs. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SACRAMENTO COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES, 15 Respondent. 16 / 17 18 Petitioner, who is proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of habeas 19 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Pending before the court is petitioner’s [amended] petition 20 for a writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1). 21 Rule 4 of the Federal Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases provides for summary 22 dismissal of a habeas petition “[i]f it plainly appears from the face of the petition and any 23 exhibits annexed to it that the petitioner is not entitled to relief in the district court.” In the 24 instant case, it is plain that petitioner is not entitled to federal habeas relief. Specifically, the 25 court lacks jurisdiction to hear this matter under § 2254 because petitioner is not in custody 26 pursuant to any state court judgment. Instead, petitioner is a non-prisoner challenging state court 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 orders relating to child custody proceedings. Petitioner’s remedies, if any, lie exclusively in state 2 court. 3 4 Based on the foregoing, the undersigned recommends that petitioner’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1) be summarily dismissed. 5 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 6 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 20 days 7 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 8 objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's 9 Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive 10 the right to appeal. See Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 11 12 13 14 DATED: May 12, 2010 ______________________________________ CRAIG M. KELLISON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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.
