Opinion
No. 2:08-cv-2139 FCD JFM (HC).
October 20, 2008
ORDER
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 General Order No. 262.
On September 23, 2008, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on petitioner and which contained notice to petitioner that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Petitioner has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. Petitioner contends he should be allowed to present his claims in a habeas corpus petition brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
The authority of the federal courts "to grant habeas relief to state prisoners is limited by § 2254, which specifies the conditions under which such relief may be granted to `a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court.'" Felker v. Turpin, 518 U.S. 651, 662 (1996) (citation omitted); see also Greenawalt v. Stewart, 105 F.3d 1287, 1287 (9th Cir. 1997). A petitioner may not "avoid the limitations imposed on successive petitions by styling his petition as one pursuant to § 2241." Greenawalt, 105 F.3d at 1287.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72-304, 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 September 23, 2008, are adopted in full; and
2. This action is dismissed without prejudice.