Not a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Walker v. Sanders

United States District Court for the Central District of California

March 26, 2010, Decided; March 26, 2010, Filed

Case No. CV 09-0702-PA (JEM)

Opinion

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the pleadings, all the records and files herein, and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. Petitioner has filed Objections to the Report and Recommendation, and the Court has made a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which Petitioner has objected. The Court concurs with and adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied and dismissed with prejudice.

DATED: March 26, 2010

/s/ Percy Anderson

PERCY ANDERSON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

JUDGMENT

In accordance with the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge filed concurrently herewith,

IT IS  [*2] HEREBY ADJUDGED that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied and dismissed with prejudice.

DATED: March 26, 2010

/s/ Percy Anderson

PERCY ANDERSON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31132 *; 2010 WL 1261931

CLARENCE WALKER, Petitioner, v. LINDA SANDERS, Warden, Respondent.

Subsequent History: Affirmed by Walker v. Sanders, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 25787 (9th Cir. Cal., Dec. 23, 2011)

Prior History: Walker v. Sanders, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31106 (C.D. Cal., Feb. 2, 2010)

CORE TERMS

Recommendation, dismissal with prejudice