Greenhalgh v. State

Full title: GARY GREENHALGH, Petitioner, v. STATE OF OREGON, Respondent

Court: United States District Court, D. Oregon

Date published: Jan 5, 2007

Civil No. 05-489-PK (D. Or. Jan. 5, 2007)

Opinion

Civil No. 05-489-PK.

January 5, 2007

ORDER

ANCER HAGGERTY, District Judge

Magistrate Judge Papak has issued a Findings and Recommendation [35] in this action. The Magistrate Judge recommended that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [2] should be denied. No objections were filed, and the case was referred to me.

The matter is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation of the Magistrate. Campbell v. United States Dist. Ct., 501 F.2d 196 (9th Cir. 1974).

No clear error appears on the face of the record. This court adopts the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation.

CONCLUSION

The Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation [35] is adopted. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [2] is DENIED, and judgment shall be entered dismissing this case with prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.