Lara Andres Michal v. Dean Borders
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Judge David O. Carter for NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss ; Memorandum of Points and Authorities 5 , Report and Recommendation (Issued) 9 . The Court accepts and adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. IT IS ORDERED that the Petition is denied, and Judgment shall be entered dismissing this action with prejudice. (dml)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
LARA ANDRES MICHAL,
Case No. CV 17-07234 DOC (RAO)
DEAN BORDERS, Warden,
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS,
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, all of the
records and files herein, and the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation
(“Report”). Further, the Court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of
the Report to which Petitioner has objected. The Report sufficiently addresses the
bulk of the arguments made by Petitioner in his Objections.
argument raised in the Objections warrants further discussion.
Petitioner contends that, contrary to what is stated in the Report, that he has
been denied a youth offender hearing. (Objections at 2, Dkt. No. 13.) Petitioner
asserts that the parole hearing provided to him was an adult parole hearing, at which
he was evaluated as an “Adult Criminal.” (Id.) Petitioner’s contention rests on the
premise that Senate Bill 260 mandates that youth offenders be evaluated for parole
eligibility under the standards of juvenile delinquency.
(Id. at 1.)
misconstrues the relief provided to youth offenders by the enactment of Senate Bill
mechanism for offenders under the age of 18 years at the time of the controlling
offense and who have certain sentences. The new law did not establish different
criteria for evaluating youth offenders as distinguished from adult offenders. See
generally 2013 Cal. Legis. Ch. 312 (S.B. 260) (West); Cal. Pen. Code § 3051.
As stated in the Report, Senate Bill 260 established a parole eligibility
Accordingly, the Court accepts and adopts the findings, conclusions, and
recommendations of the Magistrate Judge.
IT IS ORDERED that the Petition is denied, and Judgment shall be entered
dismissing this action with prejudice.
DAVID O. CARTER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?