(HC) Brown v. People of the State of California, No. 2:2012cv00217 - Document 15 (E.D. Cal. 2012)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 10/16/2012 ADOPTING 14 Findings and Recommendations in full; GRANTING 7 Motion to Dismiss; STRIKING Claim One as unexhausted; ORDERING that this petition shall continue solely on Claim Two; ORDERING Respondent to file an Answer to Claim Two within 60 days. (Michel, G)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(HC) Brown v. People of the State of California Doc. 15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ELBERT BROWN, 12 13 14 Petitioner, No. 2:12-cv-00217 MCE GGH P v. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 15 Respondent. ORDER 16 / 17 18 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of 19 habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States 20 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 On August 15, 2012, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations 22 herein (ECF No. 14) which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties 23 that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. 24 Neither party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 25 26 The Court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the Magistrate Judge’s analysis. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations (ECF No. 14) filed August 15, 2012, are 3 4 5 6 7 ADOPTED IN FULL; 2. The motion to dismiss (ECF No. 7) is GRANTED and claim one is stricken as unexhausted and this petition shall continue solely on claim two; and 3. Respondent shall file an answer to claim two within 60 days. Dated: October 16, 2012 8 9 10 ________________________________ MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
