(HC) Mullen v. Barnes, No. 2:2013cv00165 - Document 24 (E.D. Cal. 2015)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 7/29/15. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the court's 7/21/15 20 Order is VACATED; the 18 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS are ADOPTED IN FULL; Petitioner's 1 Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED; the Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to close this action; and the Court DECLINES to issue a certificate of appealability. (Meuleman, A)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(HC) Mullen v. Barnes Doc. 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MATTHEW MULLEN, 12 No. 2:13-cv-00165-MCE-EFB P Petitioner, 13 v. 14 R. E. BARNES, 15 ORDER Respondent. 16 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this application for a writ of habeas 17 18 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 19 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On April 30, 2015, the magistrate judge filed Findings and Recommendations herein 20 21 (ECF No. 18), which were served on all parties and which contained notice that any objections to 22 the Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party timely 23 filed objections to the Findings and Recommendations. On July 21, 2015, the Court adopted the Findings and Recommendations and denied 24 25 petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus. ECF No. 20. On July 27, 2015, however, 26 Petitioner filed objections to the Findings and Recommendations, along with a request for leave 27 to file those untimely objections. ECF Nos. 22 and 23. 28 /// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 In an abundance of caution, the July 21, 2015 Order adopting the Findings and 2 Recommendations (ECF No. 20) is hereby VACATED. The Court now reconsiders the Findings 3 and Recommendations in light of Petitioner’s objections. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) and 60(b). 4 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 5 Court has conducted a de novo review of this case, including Petitioner’s objections to the 6 Findings and Recommendations of the magistrate judge. Having carefully reviewed the entire 7 file, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by 8 proper analysis. 9 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 10 1. The Court’s July 21, 2015 Order (ECF No. 20) is VACATED; 11 2. The Findings and Recommendations filed April 30, 2015 (ECF No. 18) are 12 ADOPTED IN FULL; 13 3. Petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus (ECF No. 1) is DENIED; 14 4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this action; and 15 5. The Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 Dated: July 29, 2015 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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.
