(HC) Riley v. Lazano ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RICO LYNTICE RILEY, No. 2:18-cv-03050-TLN-KJN 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 PATRICK COVELLO, et al., 15 Respondents. 16 17 Petitioner Rico Lyntice Riley (“Petitioner”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed 18 an Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was 19 referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 20 302. 21 On November 2, 2020, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 22 which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to 23 the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 34.) Neither 24 party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 25 Accordingly, the Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. 26 United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are 27 reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 28 1983); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 1 Having reviewed the file under the applicable legal standards, the Court finds the Findings 2 and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The Findings and Recommendations filed November 2, 2020 (ECF No. 34), are 5 adopted in full; and 6 2. Petitioner’s Motion to Amend (ECF No. 28) is DENIED. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 DATED: December 14, 2020 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28