(HC) Johnson v. Salazar, No. 2:2017cv01310 - Document 67 (E.D. Cal. 2018)
Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 10/24/2018 GRANTING 63 Motion for Leave to file Notice of Errata and 64 Motion for Leave to file Declaration re: Controlling authority and in support of objections; ADOPTING in FULL 59 Findings and Recommendations; DENYING 52 Motion to set aside Judgment; Any further motions filed by petitioner in this closed case will be disregarded; and The court declines to issue the certificate of appealability. (Washington, S)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(HC) Johnson v. Salazar Doc. 67 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANTOINE D. JOHNSON, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:17-cv-1310 JAM KJN P Petitioner, v. ORDER J. SALAZAR, Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this application for a writ of habeas 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. 20 On August 16, 2018, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 21 which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to 22 the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Petitioner has filed 23 objections to the findings and recommendations, along with two separate declarations. 24 On September 4, 2018, petitioner filed a motion for leave to file a notice of errata 25 concerning his failure to seek leave to file his declaration, and to correct his prior use of “with 26 prejudice” to read “without prejudice.” (ECF No. 63.) Good cause appearing, petitioner’s 27 motion is granted. On September 6, 2018, petitioner filed another motion for leave to file a third 28 declaration. In an abundance of caution, petitioner’s request is granted. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 2 court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the 3 court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper 4 analysis. 5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 6 1. Petitioner’s motions (ECF Nos. 63, 64) are granted; 7 2. The findings and recommendations filed August 16, 2018, are adopted in full; 8 3. Petitioner’s motion to set aside judgment (ECF No. 52) is denied; 9 4. Any further motions filed by petitioner in this closed case will be disregarded; and 10 5. The court declines to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 U.S.C. 11 § 2253. 12 13 14 15 October 24, 2018 John A. Mendez_________________ United States District Court Judge 16 17 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.
