Smith v. Hill

Full title: EDDIE JAMES SMITH, Petitioner, v. RICK HILL, Warden, Respondent.

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

Date published: Jul 7, 2011

CV 09-07468 AHM (JCG) (C.D. Cal. Jul. 7, 2011)

Opinion

EDDIE JAMES SMITH, Petitioner, v. RICK HILL, Warden, Respondent. No. CV 09-07468 AHM (JCG) United States District Court, C.D. California. July 7, 2011

         ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

          A. HOWARD MATZ, District Judge.

         Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, all of the records herein, and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. No objections to the Report and Recommendation have been filed. The Court approves and adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation.

         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 declines to issue a certificate of appealability.

         Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

         1. Judgment shall be entered dismissing the action with prejudice.

         2. The Clerk shall serve copies of this Order and the Judgment herein on the parties.

         3. A Certificate of Appealability is denied.