Orozco v. Stainer

Full title: JOSE ANTHONY OROZCO, Petitioner, v. MICHAEL STAINER, Warden, Respondent.

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

Date published: May 17, 2011

CV 10-0199 ODW (JCG) (C.D. Cal. May. 17, 2011)

Opinion

JOSE ANTHONY OROZCO, Petitioner, v. MICHAEL STAINER, Warden, Respondent. No. CV 10-0199 ODW (JCG) United States District Court, C.D. California. May 17, 2011

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

          OTIS D. WRIGHT, II, District Judge.

         Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, Petitioner's Objections to the Report and Recommendation, Petitioner's Request for Certificate of Appealability, and the remaining record, and has made a de novo determination.

         Petitioner's Objections parrot and rehash the arguments made in the Petition and Reply, and lack merit for the reasons set forth in 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 with 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 made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253; Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003). Thus, the Court denies Petitioner's Request for Certificate of Appealability.