(HC) Hill v. Newsom ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 AVERY MARQUES HILL, No. 2:19-cv-133-KJM-EFB P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 GAVIN NEWSOM, et al., 15 Respondents. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding without counsel, has filed an application for a writ 18 of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 19 Judge as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On March 16, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were 21 served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings 22 and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. ECF No. 15. Neither party has filed 23 objections to the findings and recommendations. 24 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 25 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed 26 de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law 27 by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court 28 ///// 1 . . . .”). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be 2 supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The findings and recommendations filed March 16, 2020, are adopted in full; 5 2. Petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus is denied; 6 3. The Clerk is directed to close the case; and 7 4. For the reasons set forth in the findings and recommendations, the court declines to 8 issue a certificate of appealability. 9 DATED: March 24, 2021. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28