(HC) Best v. San Joaquin County Superior Court ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DARIN GAVIN BEST, No. 2:20-cv-01896-TLN-CKD 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, 15 Respondent. 16 17 18 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas 19 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 20 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 On February 19, 2021, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 22 which were served on Petitioner and which contained notice to Petitioner that any objections to 23 the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Petitioner has not filed 24 objections to the findings and recommendations. 25 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 26 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 27 See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Having reviewed 28 the file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 1 | the magistrate judge’s analysis. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. The findings and recommendations filed February 19, 2021, are ADOPTED IN FULL; 4 2. Petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus is summarily DISMISSED without 5 | prejudice. 6 3. The Court declines to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 U.S.C. § 7 | 2253. 8 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case. 9 | DATED: April 13, 2021 12 “ Nan Vache 13 Troy L. Nuhlep> United States District Judge 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28