Galan v. Warden

Full title: RAFEAL PEREZ GALAN, Petitioner, v. WARDEN, Respondent.

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California

Date published: Dec 31, 2010

CV 10-2945 AG (JCG) (C.D. Cal. Dec. 31, 2010)

Opinion

RAFEAL PEREZ GALAN, Petitioner, v. WARDEN, Respondent. No. CV 10-2945 AG (JCG). United States District Court, C.D. California. December 31, 2010.

          ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

          ANDREW J. GUILFORD, 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. Petitioner filed no objections to the Report and Recommendation.

         Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

         (1) the Report and Recommendation is approved and adopted;

         (2) Judgment be entered denying the Petition and dismissing this action without prejudice; and

         (3) the Clerk serve copies of this Order and the Judgment 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 the Court was correct in its procedural ruling. As a result, a Certificate of Appealability ("COA") is denied. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000) (holding that when a court dismisses a petition on procedural grounds, a COA should issue only when "a prisoner shows, at least, that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling") (emphasis added).