Filed: Jun. 22, 2015
Latest Update: Jun. 22, 2015
Summary: ORDER MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr. , Chief District Judge . Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On April 24, 2015, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findin
Summary: ORDER MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr. , Chief District Judge . Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On April 24, 2015, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the finding..
More
ORDER
MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr., Chief District Judge.
Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On April 24, 2015, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.
Although it appears from the file that petitioner's copy of the findings and recommendations was returned, petitioner was properly served. It is petitioner's responsibility to keep the court apprised of his current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of the party is fully effective.
The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge's analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The findings and recommendations filed April 24, 2015, are adopted in full;
2. This action is dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Local Rule 183(b).
3. The court declines to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 U.S.C. § 2253.
