Eric Stefon Reed v. William Muniz, LA CV 16-0729 PSG (JCG). (2018)
Court: District Court, C.D. California
Number: infdco20180205895
Visitors: 7
Filed: Jan. 30, 2018
Latest Update: Jan. 30, 2018
Summary: ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE PHILIP S. GUTIERREZ , District Judge . Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, and the remaining record, and has made a de novo determination. No objections to the Report and Recommendation have been filed. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. The Report and Recommendation is approved and accepted; 2. Judgment be entered dismissing this
Summary: ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE PHILIP S. GUTIERREZ , District Judge . Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, and the remaining record, and has made a de novo determination. No objections to the Report and Recommendation have been filed. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. The Report and Recommendation is approved and accepted; 2. Judgment be entered dismissing this a..
More
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
PHILIP S. GUTIERREZ, District Judge.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, and the remaining record, and has made a de novo determination. No objections to the Report and Recommendation have been filed.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. The Report and Recommendation is approved and accepted;
2. Judgment be entered dismissing this action with prejudice; and
3. The Clerk serve copies of this Order on the parties.
Additionally, for the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation, the Court finds that Petitioner has not shown that "jurists of reason would find it debatable whether": (1) "the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right"; and (2) "the district court was correct in its procedural ruling." See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Thus, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability.
Source: Leagle
