Opinion
Case No. CV 10-01548-VBF-JPR
02-25-2015
MARVIN W. PEGUES, Petitioner, v. J. SOTO, Warden, Respondent.
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The Court has reviewed the First Amended Petition, records on file, and Report and Recommendation of the U.S. Magistrate Judge. See 28 U.S.C. § 636. On January 22, 2015, Petitioner, through counsel, filed objections to the R&R, in which he mostly contends that the Magistrate Judge "overlooked" various things. In fact, the Magistrate Judge carefully considered each of those points in her 53-page R&R and simply rejected Petitioner's interpretation of or emphasis on them. For example, the Magistrate Judge considered and rejected Petitioner's claim (Objections at 7) that it would have been impossible for Gouche to have seen the occupants of the next car because he testified that he could not see out the tinted windows (R&R at 31.) Indeed, as the Magistrate Judge pointed out, Gouche testified that he could not see out the rear window, not the rear side windows, and he also testified that at one point the other car was parallel to his (Lodged Doc 2, 6 Rep.'s Tr. at 1206-07), presumably allowing him to see the car's occupants through the rear side windows. Similarly, the Magistrate Judge did not "overlook" Petitioner's claim (Objections at 8-9) that the gang expert's testimony was not sufficient to prove the gang enhancement (see R&R at 33-35). Indeed, the Magistrate Judge addressed each of the points Petitioner raises in his Objections.
Having reviewed de novo those portions of the R&R to which objections were filed, the Court accepts the findings and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. IT IS ORDERED that the First Amended Petition is denied without leave to amend and Judgment be entered dismissing this action with prejudice. DATED: February 25, 2015
/s/_________
VALERIE BAKER FAIRBANK
Senior United States District Judge