Filed: Dec. 27, 2018
Latest Update: Dec. 27, 2018
Summary: ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE PHILIP S. GUTIERREZ , District Judge . Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, records on file, and Report and Recommendation of U.S. Magistrate Judge. On December 6, 2018, Petitioner, through counsel, filed objections to the R. & R. and exhibits in support. The Objections take issue with some of the Magistrate Judge's findings in connection with her conclusion that Petitioner is not entitled to
Summary: ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE PHILIP S. GUTIERREZ , District Judge . Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, records on file, and Report and Recommendation of U.S. Magistrate Judge. On December 6, 2018, Petitioner, through counsel, filed objections to the R. & R. and exhibits in support. The Objections take issue with some of the Magistrate Judge's findings in connection with her conclusion that Petitioner is not entitled to ..
More
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
PHILIP S. GUTIERREZ, District Judge.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, records on file, and Report and Recommendation of U.S. Magistrate Judge. On December 6, 2018, Petitioner, through counsel, filed objections to the R. & R. and exhibits in support.
The Objections take issue with some of the Magistrate Judge's findings in connection with her conclusion that Petitioner is not entitled to any equitable tolling. But as the Magistrate Judge noted, Petitioner had retained counsel, who had secured copies of his complete case file, by no later than July 2015, and most likely considerably earlier. (See R. & R. at 15.) Petitioner did not file his federal Petition until late October 2016, a year and several months later. He has never offered any basis on which that period should be tolled.
Having reviewed de novo those portions of the R. & R. to which Petitioner objects, the Court agrees with and accepts the findings and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. But even if she was wrong on every basis urged by Petitioner, his Petition would still be late by several months. IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that Respondent's motion to dismiss the Petition as untimely be granted and that the Petition be dismissed with prejudice.
