Sharonoff v. Warden

Full title: KENNETH A. SHARONOFF, Petitioner, v. WARDEN, Respondent.

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Sep 22, 2015

2:13-cv-0794 TLN AC P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 22, 2015)

Opinion

KENNETH A. SHARONOFF, Petitioner, v. WARDEN, Respondent. No. 2:13-cv-0794 TLN AC P United States District Court, E.D. California. September 22, 2015

          ORDER

          TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.

         Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, 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 July 17, 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. Petitioner 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 carefully reviewed the entire 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 July 17, 2015, are adopted in full; and

         2. Petitioner's Motion to Amend (ECF No. 37) is denied; and

         3. Petitioner's request for release (ECF No. 41 at 3) is denied.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.