Craig v. Biter, et al.
Filing
12
ORDER ADOPTING 11 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS and Dismissing Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus; the Court DECLINES TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 07/21/2012. CASE CLOSED. (Flores, E)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
DANTE CRAIG,
1:11-cv-02165-AWI-MJS (HC)
10
Petitioner,
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATION AND DISMISSING
PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS
CORPUS
11
v.
12
13
M.D. BITER,
(Doc. 11)
Respondent.
14
/
15
16
17
Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas
corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
18
On May 24, 2012, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and Recommendation
19
that Respondent's Motion to Dismiss be GRANTED. This Findings and Recommendation
20
was served on all parties with notice that any objections were to be filed within thirty (30)
21
days of the date of service of the order. Neither party filed objections.
22
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), this Court has
23
conducted a de novo review of the case. Accordingly, having carefully reviewed the entire
24
file, the Court concludes that the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation is
25
supported by the record and proper analysis.
26
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
27
1.
28
The Findings and Recommendation issued May 24, 2012, is ADOPTED IN
FULL; and
-1-
1
2.
The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DISMISSED; and
2
3.
The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment and close the case; and
3
4.
The Court DECLINES to issue a Certificate of Appealability. 28 U.S.C. §
4
2253(c); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000) In order to obtain a
5
COA, petitioner must show: (1) that jurists of reason would find it debatable
6
whether the petition stated a valid claim of a denial of a constitutional right;
7
and (2) that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court
8
was correct in its procedural ruling. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. at 484. In
9
the present case, jurists of reason would not find debatable whether the
10
petition was properly dismissed. Petitioner has not made the required
11
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.
12
IT IS SO ORDERED.
13
14
Dated:
0m8i78
July 21, 2012
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?