Kyte v. Persson
Filing
63
OPINION AND ORDER: Upon review, I agree with Judge Beckerman's recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R (ECF 52 ) as my own opinion. Ms. Kyte's Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF 34 ) is DENIED and I decline to issue a Certificate of Appealability. The case is DISMISSED with prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed on 10/29/2020 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (gw)
Case 3:18-cv-00649-SB
Document 63
Filed 10/29/20
Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
PORTLAND DIVISION
MEGAN ELIZABETH KYTE,
Petitioner,
No. 3: 18-cv-00649-SB
V.
I
OPINION AND ORDER
ROB PERSSON,
Respondent.
MOSMAN,J.,
On July 27, 2020, Magistrate Judge Stacie F. Beckerman issued her Findings and
Recommendation (F&R) [ECF 52]. Judge Beckerman recommended that I DENY Petitioner's
Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [ECF 34] and decline to issue a Certificate of
i
Appealability. Petitioner Megan Elizabeth Kyte filed objections [ECF 61] and Respondent Rob
I
Persson filed a response [ECF 62]. Upon review, I agree with Judge Beckerman and DISM SS
this case with prejudice.
DISCUSSION
The magistrate judge makes only recommendations to the court, to which any party may
1
I
file written objections. The court is not bound by the recommendations of the magistrate judge,
I
but retains responsibility for making the final determination. The court is generally required to
I
I
make a de novo determination regarding those portions of the report or specified findings or
I
1 - OPINION AND ORDER
Case 3:18-cv-00649-SB
Document 63
Filed 10/29/20
Page 2 of 2
recommendation as to which an objection is made. 28 U.S .C. § 636(b)(l)(C). However, the court
is not ~equired to review, de novo or under any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of
the mL istrate judge as to those portions of the F&R to which no objections are addressed. See
I
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S . 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121
I
I
(9th Cir. 2003). While the level of scrutiny under which I am required to review the F&R
I
I
depends on whether or not objections have been filed, in either case, I am free to accept, reject,
or mo1ify any part of the F&R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(C).
CONCLUSION
Upon review, I agree with Judge Beckerman's recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R
[ECF 52] as my own opinion. Ms. Kyte's Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [ECF 34]
I
is DENIED and I decline to issue a Certificate of Appealability. The case is DISMISSED with
I
i
prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this
2---1
day of October, 2020.
2 - Ol INION 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?