Bouras v. Martel

Filing 11

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 3/17/2021 RECOMMENDING 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus be dismissed and this case be closed. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Henshaw, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

GEORGE JOHN BOURAS,

12

Petitioner,

13
14

v.

No. 2:17-cv-0649 TLN CKD P

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

MICHAEL MARTEL,

15

Respondent.

16
17

On January 11, 2021, petitioner was ordered to show cause why this action should not be

18

dismissed. Petitioner was warned that failure to respond to the order to show cause would result

19

in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. The time for responding to the order to show

20

cause has expired and petitioner has not responded.
Although it appears from the file that petitioner’s copy of the order to show cause was

21
22

returned, petitioner was properly served. It is the petitioner’s responsibility to keep the court

23

apprised of his current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents

24

at the record address of the party is fully effective.

25

/////

26

/////

27

/////

28

/////

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that

2

1. Petitioner’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus (ECF No. 1) be dismissed; and

3

2. This case be closed.

4

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

5

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days

6

after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written

7

objections with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate

8

Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” In his objections petitioner may address whether a

9

certificate of appealability should issue in the event he files an appeal of the judgment in this

10

case. See Rule 11, Federal Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases (the district court must issue or

11

deny a certificate of appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the applicant). Where, as

12

here, a habeas petition is dismissed on procedural grounds, a certificate of appealability “should

13

issue if the prisoner can show: (1) ‘that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the

14

district court was correct in its procedural ruling;’ and (2) ‘that jurists of reason would find it

15

debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right.’” Morris

16

v. Woodford, 229 F.3d 775, 780 (9th Cir. 2000) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

17

(2000)). Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive

18

the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

19

Dated: March 17, 2021

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

20
21
22
23
24
25

1
bour0649.frs

26
27
28
2