Summary
noting that statement of which petitioner "was fully aware . . . before and during his trial . . . cannot be said to constitute the requisite 'evidence claimed to have been wrongly excluded or to have become available only after the trial'"
Summary of this case from Johnson v. MedinaOpinion
NO. CV 11-8693-ABC (MAN)
10-28-2013
CURLEY EMANUEL JAMES, Petitioner, v. J.T. RATMAN, Respondent.
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES
MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus ("Petition"), all of the records herein, the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge ("Report"), and Petitioner's Objections to the Report. The Court has conducted a de novo review of those matters to which objections have been stated in writing. The Court accepts the findings and recommendations set forth in the Report.
IT IS ORDERED that: (1) Respondent's Motion to Dismiss the Petition is GRANTED; and (2) Judgment shall be entered dismissing this action with prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk serve copies of this Order and the Judgment herein on the parties.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
______________
AUDREY B. COLLINS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE