- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ERIC B. HERNANDEZ, No. 1:20-cv-01171-NONE-HBK (HC) 12 Petitioner, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS § 2254 13 v. PETITION 14 KINGS COUNTY JAIL, (Doc. Nos. 1, 5) 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner Eric B. Hernandez is a state pre-trial detainee proceeding pro se and in forma 18 pauperis with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Doc. No. 1.) 19 Petitioner is currently detained in a county jail while awaiting trial, but he asks this federal court 20 to intervene in his California state court criminal proceeding and to order his release due to the 21 risk of him contracting COVID-19 while incarcerated. (Id. at 2–3.) This matter was referred to a 22 United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rule 302. 23 Pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, the assigned magistrate judge 24 screened the instant petition and issued findings and recommendations on August 25, 2020, 25 recommending that the pending petition be dismissed in accordance with the Younger abstention 26 ///// 27 ///// 28 ///// 1 doctrine,1 and because petitioner has failed to state a cognizable claim for federal habeas relief. 2 (Id. at 2–3.) To date, no objections have been filed, and the time to do so has passed. 3 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), the court has conducted a 4 de novo review of the case. The court finds the pending findings and recommendations to be 5 supported by the record and proper analysis and will adopt the findings and recommendations.2 6 In addition, the court also finds that petitioner is not entitled to a certificate of 7 appealability (COA) under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2253. “Section 2253(c)(1)(A) provides that unless a 8 circuit justice or judge issues a COA, an appeal may not be taken from ‘the final order in a habeas 9 corpus proceeding in which the detention complained of arises out of process issued by a State 10 court.’” Harbison v. Bell, 556 U.S. 180, 183 (2009). To be entitled to a COA, petitioner must 11 make a substantial showing that “reasonable jurists could debate whether (or, for that matter, 12 agree that) the petition should have been resolved in a different manner or that the issues 13 presented were adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 14 U.S. 473, 483–84 (2000) (quoting Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880 (1983)). Neither of the 15 requirements exists here. The court therefore declines to issue a certificate of appealability. 16 Accordingly, 17 1. The findings and recommendations issued on August 25, 2020 (Doc. No. 5) are 18 ADOPTED in full; 19 2. The petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. No. 1) is DISMISSED; 20 3. The court DECLINES to issue a certificate of appealability; and 21 22 1 Under the Younger abstention doctrine, federal courts should “abstain from exercising our 23 jurisdiction in certain circumstances when . . . asked to enjoin ongoing state enforcement proceedings.” Page v. King, 932 F.3d 898, 901–02 (9th Cir. 2019) (quoting Nationwide Biweekly 24 Admin., Inc. v. Owen, 873 F.3d 716, 727 (9th Cir. 2017)). 25 2 The court notes that at the time those findings and recommendations were issued, petitioner had yet to exhaust his claim before the California Supreme Court. (See Doc. No. 5 at 2–3). It now 26 appears that petitioner has exhausted his claim by presenting it to the state’ highest court. See 27 Hernandez (Eric B.) on HC, No. S264342 (Cal. Nov. 24, 2020). Nevertheless, the federal petition should still be dismissed for the alternate reasons fully discussed in the findings and 28 recommendations. (See Doc. No. 5 at 2–3). 1 4. The clerk of court is DIRECTED to assign a district judge to this case for the purpose of 2 closing the case, then to close the case. 3 | IT IS SO ORDERED. a 7. Dated: _ February 2, 2021 VL AL oye 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Document Info
Docket Number: 1:20-cv-01171
Filed Date: 2/2/2021
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 6/19/2024