Pettit v. Nooth
Filing
28
OPINION AND ORDER. I Adopt Magistrate Judge Acosta's Findings and Recommendation 26 as my own opinion. I Deny the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 1 , and Dismiss this action with prejudice. Additionally, I Deny a Certificate of Appealability pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sect. 2253(c)(2) because Petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed on 06/13/2011 by Judge James A. Redden. (pvh)
"
~
LEI"; '-, -,',. '"
,
1.·.J,JUN'1115:LJ4USDc-oRP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF OREGON
PORTLAND DIVISION
MICHAEL PETTIT,
Civ. No. 09-1281-AC
Petitioner,
OPINION AND ORDER
v.
MARK NOOTH, Superintendent of Snake
River Correctional Institution,
Respondent.
REDDEN, Judge:
On May 12, 2011, Magistrate Judge John Acosta filed his Findings and Recommendation
(doc. 26) that the court deny the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (doc. I), and dismiss this
action. Magistrate Judge Acosta also recommended the court deny a Certificate of Appealability
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 22S3(c)(2) because Petitioner failed to make a substantial showing of the
denial of a constitutional right.
PAGE I - OPINION AND ORDER
The matter is now before this court. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(A); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).
Neither party timely filed objections. This relieves me of my obligation to review Magistrate
Judge Acosta's factual [mdings de novo. 28 U.S.c. § 636(b)(I)(C); see also Thomas v. Am, 474
U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985); United States v. Revna-Tapil!, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003).
Having reviewed the legal principles de novo, I find no error.
Accordingly, I ADOPT Magistrate Judge Acosta's Findings and Recommendation
(doc. 26) as my own opinion. I DENY the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (doc. 1), and
DISMISS this action with prejudice. Additionally, I DENY a Certificate of Appealability
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) because Petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing of
the denial of a constitutional right.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this
n
day of June, 2011.
PAGE 2 - OPINION AND ORDER
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?