Hill v. Phieffer

Filing 17

CLERK'S JUDGMENT. The Court OVERRULES Petitioner's Objection, ADOPTS Judge Crawford's Report and Recommendation, GRANTS Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, and DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE Petitioner's Petition. Furthermore, becau se Petitioner's Petition would be untimely even if the Court granted Petitioner the most generous amount of tolling possible under Petitioner's allegations, Petitioner has failed to show that jurists of reason could disagree with the di strict court's resolution of his constitutional claims or that jurists could conclude the issues presented are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further. Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 327 (2003); see also Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Accordingly, the Court DENIES a certificate of appealability. Because this concludes the litigation in this matter, the Clerk SHALL close the file. Signed by Judge Janis L. Sammartino on 9/12/2017.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(mpl)

United States District Court
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Diriki A. Hill
Civil Action No.

16cv2843-JLS-KSC

Plaintiff,
V.

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE

Christian Phieffer

Defendant.

Decision by Court. This action came to trial or hearing before the Court. The issues have been tried
or heard and a decision has been rendered.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
The Court OVERRULES Petitioner’s Objection, ADOPTS Judge Crawford’s Report and
Recommendation, GRANTS Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, and DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE
Petitioner’s Petition. Furthermore, because Petitioner’s Petition would be untimely even if the Court
granted Petitioner the most generous amount of tolling possible under Petitioner’s allegations,
Petitioner has failed to show “that jurists of reason could disagree with the district court’s resolution of
his constitutional claims or that jurists could conclude the issues presented are adequate to deserve
encouragement to proceed further.” Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 327 (2003); see also Slack v.
McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Accordingly, the Court DENIES a certificate of appealability.
Because this concludes the litigation in this matter, the Clerk SHALL close the file.

Date:

9/12/17

CLERK OF COURT
JOHN MORRILL, Clerk of Court
By: s/ M. Lozano
M. Lozano, Deputy