UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
February 7, 2012
LARRY SMALL, WARDEN,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: James V. Selna United States District Judge
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATED MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus ("Petition"), all of the records herein, the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge ("Report"), and petitioner's Objection to the Report. The Court has conducted a de novo review of those portions of the Report to which objections have been stated in writing.
In his Objection to the Report, Petitioner purports to raise numerous new claims for habeas relief that were not alleged in the Petition. It is unclear that these belatedly-raised claims are unexhausted. A district court has discretion, but is not required, to consider evidence or claims presented for the first time in objections to a report and recommendation. See Brown v. Roe, 279 F.3d 742, 744-45 (9th Cir. 2002); United States v. Howell, 231 F.3d 615, 621-22 (9th Cir. 2000). The Court exercises its discretion and declines to consider the newly-raised habeas claims set forth in the Objection.
Having completed its review, the Court accepts the findings and recommendations set forth in the Report. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: (1) the Petition is denied; and (2) Judgment shall be entered dismissing this action with prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk serve copies of this Order and the Judgment herein on the parties.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.