Sarmiento v. Rackley
Filing
12
ORDER ADOPTING 6 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 5/22/15. All claims in the petition are summarily dismissed except for petitioners challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction; and the court declines to issue the certificate of appealability.(Dillon, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
SAMUEL SARMIENTO,
12
Petitioner,
13
14
No. 2:15-cv-0364 KJM CKD P
v.
ORDER
RONALD RACKLEY,
15
Respondent.
16
Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this application for a writ of habeas
17
18
corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as
19
provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On March 27, 2015, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were
20
21
served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings
22
and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Petitioner has filed objections to the
23
findings and recommendations.
24
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this
25
court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the file, the court
26
finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.
27
/////
28
/////
1
1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
2
1. The findings and recommendations filed March 27, 2015, are adopted in full; and
3
2. All claims in the petition are summarily dismissed except for petitioner’s challenge to
4
the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction; and
5
3. The court declines to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 U.S.C.
6
§ 2253.
7
DATED: May 22, 2015.
8
9
10
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?