UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
January 10, 2012
ALFREDO JAIMES, PETITIONER,
K. HARRINGTON, WARDEN, RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. George H. WU United States District Judge
ORDER ACCEPTING 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 Amended Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, and Petitioner's Objections to the Amended Report and Recommendation. Further, the Court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Amended 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 the Traverse, and fail for the reasons articulated in the Amended Report and Recommendation.
Additionally, for the reasons stated in the Amended 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.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.