Jae Jeong Lyu v. Superior Court of California

Filing 37

ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR HEARING AND ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Judge James V. Selna for Report and Recommendation (Issued), 32 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the request for hearing (Dkt. 33 ) is denied, and Judgment shall be entered dismissing Claim One for lack of jurisdiction, and dismissing Claims Two through Nine as untimely. (es)

1

O

2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JAE JEONG LYU,

12
13

Petitioner,
v.

14

SUPERIOR COURT OF

15

CALIFORNIA,

16

Case No. 2:23-cv-08912-JVS-KES
ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR
HEARING AND ACCEPTING REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION OF U.S.
MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Respondent.

17
18
19

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition (Dkt. 1), the

20

other records on file herein, and the Report and Recommendation of the U.S.

21

Magistrate Judge (“R&R” at Dkt. 32). No objections to the R&R were filed, and

22

the deadline for filing such objections has passed. The Court accepts the report,

23

findings, and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge.

24

During the period for filing objections to the R&R, Petitioner did file a

25

motion requesting a hearing. (Dkt. 33.) That motion repeats claims raised in the

26

Petition, i.e., that the attorneys appointed to represent him in his state court criminal

27

trials and/or appeals provided ineffective assistance of counsel. (Compare Dkt. 1 at

28

1

9-10.) Petitioner is not entitled to an evidentiary hearing on these claims. See

2

generally Cullen v. Pinholster, 563 U.S. 170, 186 (2011). As explained in the

3

R&R, he cannot obtain federal habeas relief on these claims because (a) he was not

4

in custody under the Trish B. convictions when he filed the Petition, and (b) the

5

claims challenging the Vanessa S. convictions are untimely.

6

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the request for hearing (Dkt. 33) is

7

denied, and Judgment shall be entered dismissing Claim One for lack of

8

jurisdiction, and dismissing Claims Two through Nine as untimely.

9
10
11
12
13
14

DATED: August 30, 2024

____________________________________
JAMES V. SELNA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2