Opinion
Case No. 6:17-cv-00925-MK
05-27-2020
RANDALL RAY MARTINO, Petitioner, v. CHRISTINE POPOFF, Superintendent, Oregon State Correctional Institution, Respondent.
ORDER
:
Magistrate Judge Mustafa Kasubhai filed his Findings and Recommendations ("F&R") (doc. 54) recommending that petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (doc. 2) be dismissed with prejudice. This case is now before me. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).
When either party objects to any portion of a magistrate judge's F&R, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the magistrate judge's report. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Business Machines, Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert denied, 455 U.S. 920 (1982). Petitioner has filed timely objections. (doc. 56) Thus, I review the F&R de novo.
Having considered the record and the arguments offered by petitioner, the Court finds no error in Magistrate Judge Kasubhai's analysis. Therefore, the Court adopts the F&R (doc. 54) in part. Thus, the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (doc. 2) is DISMISSED, with prejudice.
However, in considering petitioner's objections, the Court grants the request for a certificate of appealability. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 327 (2003). (If a court denies a habeas petition, the court may issue a certificate of appealability if "jurists of reason could disagree with the district court's resolution of [the petitioner's] constitutional claims or that jurists could conclude the issues presented are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.")
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated this 27th day of May, 2020.
/s/Ann Aiken
Ann Aiken
United States District Judge