UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
September 18, 2012
RONALD C. DIAZ, PETITIONER,
ATTORNEY GENERAL, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. George H. WU United States District Judge
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, Petitioner's Objections to the Report and Recommendation, and the remaining record, and has made a de novo determination.
Petitioner affirmatively states in his Objections that he has no objection to the dismissal of this action without prejudice, and no objection to the denial of his Motion for Stay and Abeyance. Furthermore, it appears from the Objections that Petitioner intends to continue seeking state post-conviction relief.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. The Report and Recommendation is approved and accepted;
2. Judgment be entered denying the Petition and dismissing this action without prejudice;
3. Petitioner's Motion for Stay and Abeyance [Docket No. 4] is DENIED; and
4. The Clerk serve copies of this Order on the parties.
Additionally, for the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation, the Court finds that Petitioner has not shown that "jurists of reason would find it debatable whether": (1) "the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right"; and (2) "the district court was correct in its procedural ruling." See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Thus, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.