(HC) Kalso v. Butte County Superior Court, No. 2:2024cv01003 - Document 9 (E.D. Cal. 2025)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 3/11/2025 ADOPTING 8 Findings and Recommendations in Full, DENYING 4 Motion for Release, DISMISSING this case without prejudice for failure to exhaust, and DECLINING to issue a certificate of appealability. CASE CLOSED. (Deputy Clerk AMW)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(HC) Kalso v. Butte County Superior Court Doc. 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ZACHARY LLOYD KALSO, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:24-cv-01003-TLN-EFB (HC) Petitioner, v. ORDER BUTTE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner Zachary Lloyd Kalso (“Petitioner”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed an 18 application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The matter was referred to 19 a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On January 24, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations which 21 were served on Petitioner and which contained notice that any objections to the findings and 22 recommendations were to be filed within fourteen (14) days. The deadline has passed and 23 Petitioner has not filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 24 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 25 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 26 See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the 27 magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court[.]”). 28 Having reviewed the file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 the record and by the proper analysis. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. The findings and recommendations, (ECF No. 8), are ADOPTED in full; 4 2. The motion for release, (ECF No. 4), is DENIED; 5 3. The case is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to exhaust; and 6 4. The Court DECLINES to issue a certificate of appealability. 7 DATED: March 11, 2025 8 9 10 11 12 ___________________________________ TROY L. NUNLEY CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.
