Cortes v. Mills

Filing 41

ORDER: Adopting Findings and Recommendation 38 in its entirety. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 2 is denied and this case is dismissed. Signed on 1/4/12 by Chief Judge Ann L. Aiken. (ljb)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

ORLANDO CORTES,
Petitioner,

Civ. No. 09-06-AA
ORDER

v.
DON MILLS,
Respondent.

Aiken, Chief Judge:
Magistrate Judge Coffin issued his Findings and Recommendation in the above-captioned
case on July 18, 2011. Magistrate Judge Coffin recommends that the petition for writ of habeas
corpus be denied and the case dismissed. Magistrate Judge Coffin found that petitioner's claims
were procedurally defaulted and that petitioner did not establish cause, prejudice or actual innocence.
The matter is now before me. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).
When either party objects to any portion of a magistrate judge's Findings and
Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the

1

- OPINION AND ORDER

magistrate judge's report. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(I); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore
Business Machines. Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981). Petitioner timely filed objections to
the Findings and Recommendation. Upon de novo review, I find no error and adopt the analysis
contained in Magistrate Judge Coffin's opinion.
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Coffin's Findings and
Recommendation (doc. 38) filed July 18,2011, is ADOPTED in its entirety. The Petition for Writ
of Habeas Corpus (doc. 2) is DENIED and this case is DISMISSED.

Certificate ofAppealability
Should petitioner appeal, a certificate ofappealability should be denied as petitioner has not
made a substantial showing of the denial ofa constitutional right. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (c) (2).

-I-

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated this

day of January, 2012.

Ann Aiken

United States District Judge

2

- OPINION AND ORDER