From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Martin v. Yates

United States District Court, S.D. California
Dec 25, 2009
CASE NO. 08CV2203 BEN (BLM) (S.D. Cal. Dec. 25, 2009)

Opinion

CASE NO. 08CV2203 BEN (BLM).

December 25, 2009


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION


Petitioner Robbie Martin, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, petitions for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Dkt. No. 1. Respondent filed an answer. Dkt. No. 8. Petitioner did not file a traverse.

The Court notes that Petitioner did not file a traverse despite the Magistrate Judge granting Petitioner a 90-day extension of time in which to file the traverse. Dkt. No. 11.

On August 27, 2009, the Honorable Magistrate Judge Barbara L. Major issued a Report and Recommendation, recommending that the petition be denied with prejudice. Dkt. No. 13. Any objections to the Report and Recommendation were due September 18, 2009. Id. Petitioner did not file any objections or request an extension of time to file objections. For the reasons stated below, the Court ADOPTS the well-reasoned Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and DENIES WITH PREJUDICE Petitioner's petition.

A district judge "may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition" of a Magistrate Judge on a dispositive matter. FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). "[T]he district judge must determine de novo any part of the [report and recommendation] that has been properly objected to." FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3). However, "[t]he statute makes it clear that the district judge must review the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise." United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc), cert denied, 540 U.S. 900 (2003) (emphasis in original); see also Wang v. Masaitis, 416 F.3d 992, 1000 n. 13 (9th Cir. 2005). "Neither the Constitution nor the statute requires a district judge to review, de novo, findings and recommendations that the parties themselves accept as correct." Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121.

In the absence of any objections, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation in its entirety and DENIES WITH PREJUDICE Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus. The Clerk shall close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Martin v. Yates

United States District Court, S.D. California
Dec 25, 2009
CASE NO. 08CV2203 BEN (BLM) (S.D. Cal. Dec. 25, 2009)
Case details for

Martin v. Yates

Case Details

Full title:ROBBIE MARTIN, Petitioner, v. JAMES A. YATES, Warden, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, S.D. California

Date published: Dec 25, 2009

Citations

CASE NO. 08CV2203 BEN (BLM) (S.D. Cal. Dec. 25, 2009)