(HC) Findley v. County of El Dorado ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOHN EDWARD FINDLEY, No. 2:21-cv-1117 KJM AC P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 COUNTY OF EL DORADO, et al., 15 Respondents. 16 17 Petitioner, a pretrial detainee proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of 18 habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. 19 On June 25, 2021, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were 20 served on petitioner and which contained notice to petitioner that any objections to the findings 21 and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. ECF No. 4. Petitioner has not 22 filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 23 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 24 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed 25 de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law 26 by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court 27 . . . .”). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be 28 supported by the record and by the proper analysis. ] Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed June 25, 2021, ECF No. 4, are adopted in full. 3 2. Petitioner’s application for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed without prejudice. 4 3. The court declines to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 U.S.C. 5 || § 2253. 6 4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. 7 | DATED: August 20, 2021. 8 9 l cae AS Murl ¢ iJ 10 CHIEF NT] ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28