(HC) Fort v. Hatton, No. 2:2018cv02603 - Document 20 (E.D. Cal. 2019)

Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 12/4/2019 ADOPTING the findings and recommendations filed 10/29/2019 in full; DENYING Petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus; DIRECTING the Clerk to close the case; and the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. CASE CLOSED (Becknal, R)

Download PDF
(HC) Fort v. Hatton Doc. 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CECIL LAMAR FORT, 12 Petitioner, 13 14 No. 2:18-cv-2603-JAM-EFB P v. ORDER SHAWN HATTON, 15 Respondent. 16 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding through counsel, has filed an application for a writ 17 18 of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States 19 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On October 29, 2019 the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 20 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. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 24 25 court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the 26 court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper 27 analysis. 28 ///// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed October 29, 2019, are adopted in full; 3 2. Petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus is denied; 4 3. The Clerk is directed to close the case; and 5 4. The court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. 6 7 8 9 DATED: December 4, 2019 /s/ John A. Mendez____________ _____ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 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.