From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hendricks v. Belleque

United States District Court, D. Oregon, Portland Division
Apr 12, 2010
Civil Case No. 07-1080-ST (D. Or. Apr. 12, 2010)

Opinion

Civil Case No. 07-1080-ST.

April 12, 2010

Tonia L. Moro, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Medford, Oregon., Attorney for Petitioner.

Jacqueline Sadker Kamins, State of Oregon, Department of Justice, Salem, Oregon., Attorney for Respondent.


ORDER


The Honorable Janice M. Stewart, United States Magistrate Judge, filed Findings and Recommendation on February 2, 2010. Petitioner filed timely objections to the Findings and Recommendation.

When either party objects to any portion of a magistrate's Findings and Recommendation concerning a dispositive motion or prisoner petition, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the magistrate's report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b);McDonnell Douglas Com. v. Commodore Business Machines. Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920 (1982). This court has, therefore, given de novo review of the rulings of Magistrate Judge Stewart.

This court ADOPTS the Findings and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Stewart (#47) dated February 2, 2010 in its entirety.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (#11) is denied. The Court also declines to issue a Certificate of Appealability on the basis that petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right pursuant to 28 USC § 2253(c)(2).

DATED this 12 day of April, 2010.


Summaries of

Hendricks v. Belleque

United States District Court, D. Oregon, Portland Division
Apr 12, 2010
Civil Case No. 07-1080-ST (D. Or. Apr. 12, 2010)
Case details for

Hendricks v. Belleque

Case Details

Full title:DICK HENDRICKS, Petitioner, v. BRIAN BELLEQUE, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, D. Oregon, Portland Division

Date published: Apr 12, 2010

Citations

Civil Case No. 07-1080-ST (D. Or. Apr. 12, 2010)