UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 28, 2011
GERARDO REYES, PETITIONER,
GREG LEWIS, ACTING WARDEN, RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. VIRGINIA A. Phillips United States District Judge
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, the records on file, the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, and the Petitioner's Objections. Further, the Court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which Petitioner has objected. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).
Petitioner's Objections essentially rehash the arguments made in the Petition and fail for the reasons articulated in the Report and Recommendation. Petitioner has not demonstrated that the admission of Vidales' testimony violated due process or that his testimony was false. See Cook v. Schriro, 538 F.3d 1000, 1017-18 (9th Cir. 2008).
Additionally, for the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation, the Court finds that Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253; Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003). Thus, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. Judgment shall be entered dismissing the action with prejudice.
2. The Clerk shall serve copies of this Order and the Judgment herein on the parties.
3. A Certificate of Appealability is denied.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.