(HC) Thao v. Sherman, No. 2:2020cv00049 - Document 8 (E.D. Cal. 2020)

Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 11/20/20 ADOPTING 7 Findings and Recommendations. The petition 1 is dismissed. The court declines to issue the certificate of appealability. (Kaminski, H)

Download PDF
(HC) Thao v. Sherman Doc. 8 Case 2:20-cv-00049-JAM-DB Document 8 Filed 11/23/20 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TOU C. THAO, 12 No. 2:20-cv-0049 JAM DB P Petitioner, 13 v. 14 STU SHERMAN, 15 ORDER Respondent. 16 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas 17 18 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Plaintiff alleges he is serving an unauthorized sentence. 19 The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) 20 and Local Rule 302. On August 10, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 21 22 which were served on petitioner and which contained notice to petitioner that any objections to 23 the findings and recommendations were to be filed within thirty days. (ECF No. 7.) Petitioner 24 has not filed objections to the findings and recommendations. The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 25 26 supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. 27 //// 28 //// 1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:20-cv-00049-JAM-DB Document 8 Filed 11/23/20 Page 2 of 2 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed August 10, 2020, are adopted in full; 3 2. The petition (ECF No. 1) is dismissed; and 4 3. The court declines to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 U.S.C. § 5 2253. 6 7 8 9 DATED: November 20, 2020 /s/ John A. Mendez THE HONORABLE 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.