James Carl Kelly v. Galvin Newsome, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California adopted the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations and dismissed James Carl Kelly’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition for lack of jurisdiction. The court denied his motion for a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order, directed closure of the case, and declined to issue a certificate of appealability.

Holdings

1. The petition must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because petitioner was not entitled to habeas relief, as determined in the adopted findings and recommendations.
2. Petitioner's motion for a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order was denied.
3. A certificate of appealability should not issue because reasonable jurists would not find the court's determination debatable or wrong and petitioner should not be allowed to proceed further.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the magistrate judge's recommendation to dismiss the § 2254 petition for lack of jurisdiction should be adopted.
2. Whether petitioner was entitled to a preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order.
3. Whether a certificate of appealability should issue from the dismissal of the habeas petition.

Disposition

dismissed