Joseph Daniel Ramos v. Raymond Madden
Filing
38
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Judge Valerie Baker Fairbank for Report and Recommendation (Issued) 24 . IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Judgment be entered (1) denying the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus; and (2) dismissing this action with prejudice. (iva)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
10
JOSEPH DANIEL RAMOS,
Petitioner,
11
v.
12
13
Case No. ED CV 15-02519-VBF (KK)
RAYMOND MADDEN,
Respondent.
14
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS
AND RECOMMENDATION OF
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE
JUDGE
15
16
17
Pursuant to Title 28 of the United States Code, section 636, the Court has
18
reviewed the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, the records on file, and the
19
Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. The Court has
20
engaged in de novo review of those portions of the Report to which Petitioner has
21
objected. The Court accepts the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate
22
Judge.
23
In his objections to the Report, Petitioner also requests an evidentiary
24
hearing. However, in habeas proceedings, “an evidentiary hearing is not required
25
on issues that can be resolved by reference to the state court record.” Totten v.
26
Merkle, 137 F.3d 1172, 1176 (9th Cir. 1998); see also Earp v. Ornoski, 431 F.3d
27
1158, 1173 (9th Cir. 2005). “It is axiomatic that when issues can be resolved with
28
reference to the state court record, an evidentiary hearing becomes nothing more
1
than a futile exercise.” Totten, 137 F.3d at 1176. Here, the Magistrate Judge
2
concluded all of Petitioner’s claims could be resolved by reference to the state
3
court record. Accordingly, the Court denies Petitioner’s request for an evidentiary
4
hearing.
5
6
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Judgment be entered (1) denying the
Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus; and (2) dismissing this action with prejudice.
7
8
Dated: January 18, 2017
9
10
HON. VALERIE BAKER FAIRBANK
United States District Judge
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?