BUNYARD v. DAVIS, 2:15-cv-01790 WBS AC P. (2016)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20160201a87
Visitors: 9
Filed: Jan. 28, 2016
Latest Update: Jan. 28, 2016
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM B. SHUBB , District Judge . Petitioner, a state prisoner with counsel, has filed this 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 January 12, 2016, 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 recommen
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM B. SHUBB , District Judge . Petitioner, a state prisoner with counsel, has filed this 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 January 12, 2016, 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 recommend..
More
ORDER
WILLIAM B. SHUBB, District Judge.
Petitioner, a state prisoner with counsel, has filed this 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 January 12, 2016, 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.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having reviewed the relevant portions of the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The findings and recommendations filed January 12, 2016, are adopted in full; and
2. Petitioner's motion for equitable tolling (ECF No. 20) is GRANTED IN PART, for a period of sixty-eight (68) days, and the filing date for the petition accordingly is extended to August 31, 2016.
Source: Leagle
