Opinion
Case No. ED CV 12-2032 GW (JCG)
04-08-2015
RONALD C. DIAZ, Petitioner, v. DANIEL PARAMO, Warden, Respondent.
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY
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, and the remaining record, and has made a de novo determination.
Petitioner's Objections generally reiterate the arguments made in the Petition, 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 accepted;
2. Judgment be entered denying the Petition and dismissing this action with prejudice; and
3. The Clerk serve copies of this Order on the parties.
Accordingly, Plaintiff's Application for the Appointment of Counsel, [Dkt. No. 23], is DENIED AS MOOT. Moreover, the Court notes that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel does not extend to federal habeas actions. See Knaubert v. Goldsmith, 791 F.2d 722, 728 (9th Cir. 1986).
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. DATED: April 8, 2015
/s/_________
HON. GEORGE H. WU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE