Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Sara Charlene Pelaya v. Matthew Cate

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION


March 14, 2011

SARA CHARLENE PELAYA, PETITIONER,
v.
MATTHEW CATE, RESPONDENT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Valerie Baker Fairbank United States District Judge

ORDER (1) ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING THE AMENDED REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE, AND (2) DISMISSING THE PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636, the Court has made a de novo review of the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus ("Petition"), Respondent's Motion to Dismiss, Petitioner's Opposition and Objections, all of the records herein and the Amended Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge ("Amended Report").

IT IS ORDERED that: (1) the Court accepts and adopts the Amended Report and Recommendation, (2) the Court declines to issue a Certificate of Appealability ("COA");*fn1 and (3) Judgment be entered dismissing the Petition with prejudice.

Under 28 U.S.C. §2253(c)(2), a Certificate of Appealability may issue "only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." Here, the Court has adopted the Magistrate Judge's finding and conclusion that the Petition is time-barred. Thus, the Court's determination of whether a Certificate of Appealability should issue here is governed by the Supreme Court's decision in Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 120 S. Ct. 1595 (2000), where the Supreme Court held that, "[w]hen the district court denies a habeas petition on procedural grounds without reaching the prisoner's underlying constitutional claim, a COA should issue when the prisoner shows, at least, that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling." 529 U.S. at 484. As the Supreme Court further explained:


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.