Martin v. Beard et al
Filing
37
ORDER (1) 24 Adopting Report and Recommendation and (2) 14 Granting Motion to Dismiss. This Court has reviewed Petitioner's objections and again reviewed the R&R and again adopts the Magistrate Judge's recommendation in full and GRANTS Respondent's motion to dismiss. The Court finds no basis for a certificate of appealability. Signed by Judge Dana M. Sabraw on 9/22/2015.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(aef)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
LAWRENCE MAURICE MARTIN,
11
vs.
12
13
Petitioner,
JEFFREY BEARD,
14
CASE NO. 14cv1694 DMS (RBB)
ORDER (1) ADOPTING REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION AND
(2) GRANTING MOTION TO
DISMISS
Respondent.
15
16
On July 17, 2014, Petitioner Lawrence Maurice Martin, a state prisoner
17 proceeding pro se, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
18 2254. On May 14, 2015, Magistrate Judge Ruben B. Brooks issued a Report and
19 Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that the Court grant Respondent’s motion
20 to dismiss. Neither party filed objections to the R&R, and on June 30, 2015, this Cort
21 issued an order adopting the R&R and granting the motion to dismiss.
On July 17, 2015, Petitioner filed a motion for a copy of the R&R. The Court
22
23 granted that motion, and also gave Petitioner an opportunity to file objections to the
24 R&R. On August 24, 2015, Petitioner filed his objections. Respondent did not file a
25 reply.
26
This Court has reviewed Petitioner’s objections and again reviewed the R&R and
27 again adopts the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation in full and GRANTS
28 / / /
-1-
14cv1694
1 Respondent’s motion to dismiss. The Court finds no basis for a certificate of
2 appealability.
3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
4 DATED: September 22, 2015
5
6
7
HON. DANA M. SABRAW
United States District Judge
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-
14cv1694
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?