Opinion
No. CV-09-6206-SU
12-02-2011
EDWARD T. RAY, Petitioner, v. DON MILLS, Respondent.
ORDER
HERNANDEZ, District Judge:
Magistrate Judge Sullivan issued a Findings and Recommendation (#35) on October 31, 2011, in which she recommends the Court deny petitioner's Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, and decline to issue a Certificate of Appealability. Petitioner has timely filed objections to the Findings and Recommendation. The matter is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).
When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge's report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9th Cir. 2009); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc).
I have carefully considered petitioner's objections and conclude that the objections do not provide a basis to modify the Findings and Recommendation. I have also reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and find no error in the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation.
CONCLUSION
The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Sullivan's Findings and Recommendation [#35] and, therefore, petitioner's Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [#9] is denied. The Court declines to issue a Certificate of Appealability on the basis that petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
MARCO A. HERNANDEZ
United States District Judge