Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

SMITH v. ADAMS, EDCV 10-1119-GW (PJW). (2014)

Court: District Court, C.D. California Number: infdco20141114892 Visitors: 9
Filed: Nov. 11, 2014
Latest Update: Nov. 11, 2014
Summary: ORDER ACCEPTING AMENDED FINAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY GEORGE H. WU, District Judge. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, records on file, and the Amended Final Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. Further, the Court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report to which Petitioner has objected. The Court accepts the findings and recomme
More

ORDER ACCEPTING AMENDED FINAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

GEORGE H. WU, District Judge.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, records on file, and the Amended Final Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. Further, the Court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report to which Petitioner has objected. The Court accepts the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge.

Further, for the reasons stated in the Amended Final Report and Recommendation, the Court finds that Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right or that it erred in its procedural ruling and, therefore, a certificate of appealability is denied. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer