(HC) Perez v. Spearman, No. 2:2019cv01223 - Document 21 (E.D. Cal. 2020)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 10/15/2020 ADOPTING 16 Findings and Recommendations in full; DENYING 13 Motion to Dismiss; This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for all further pretrial proceedings. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(HC) Perez v. Spearman Doc. 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SAM PEREZ, 12 Petitioner, 13 14 No. 2:19-CV-1223-KJM-DMC-P v. ORDER M. ELLIOT SPEARMAN, 15 Respondent. 16 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of 17 18 habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 19 Judge as provided by Eastern District of California local rules. On June 19, 2020, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations, 20 21 which were served on the parties and which contained notice that the parties may file objections 22 within the time specified therein. No objections to the findings and recommendations have been 23 filed. The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United 24 25 States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 26 reviewed de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations 27 of law by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] 28 ///// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 court . . . .”). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be 2 supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The findings and recommendations filed June 19, 2020, are adopted in full; 5 2. Respondent’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 13) is denied; and 6 3. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for all further 7 pretrial proceedings. 8 DATED: October 15, 2020. 9 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.
