(HC) Foreman v. State of California ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TREVON LEE FOREMAN, ) Case No.: 1:22-cv-0589 JLT HBK ) 12 Petitioner, ) ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND ) RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING PETITION 13 v. ) FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, DECLINING TO ISSUE CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY, 14 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ) AND DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE ) CASE 15 Respondent. ) ) (Docs. 1, 8) 16 17 The assigned magistrate judge recommended that the pending petition be dismissed without 18 prejudice for failure to prosecute after Petitioner failed to keep the Court informed of his proper 19 mailing address. (Doc. 8.) Those Findings and Recommendations were served upon Petitioner at the 20 only address known to the Court. It also notified Plaintiff that if he had objections, he had to file them 21 within 14 days after service. (Id. at 5.) However, the Findings and Recommendations returned as 22 undeliverable. Petitioner has not taken any action to notify the Court of his new address, to prosecute 23 the petition or to object to the recommendation of dismissal. 24 According to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), the Court conducted a de novo review of the case. 25 Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court concludes that the magistrate judge’s Findings and 26 Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. 27 Having determined that Petitioner is not entitled to habeas relief, the Court now turns to 28 whether a certificate of appealability should issue. The federal rules governing habeas cases brought 1 || by state prisoners require a district court issuing an order denying a habeas petition to either grant or 2 || deny therein a certificate of appealability. See Rules Governing § 2254 Case, Rule 11(a). A prisoner 3 || seeking a writ of habeas corpus has no absolute entitlement to appeal, rather an appeal is only allowe 4 certain circumstances. Miller-El vy. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 335-36 (2003); see also 28 U.S.C. 5 |] § 2253(c)(1)(A) (permitting habeas appeals from state prisoners only with a certificate of 6 || appealability). A judge shall grant a certificate of appealability “only if the applicant has made a 7 || substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right,” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), and the certificate 8 || must indicate which issues satisfy this standard, 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(3). In the present case, the cour 9 || finds that reasonable jurists would not find the Court’s rejection of Petitioner’s claims to be debatable 10 || or conclude that the petition should proceed further. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 11 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on August 2, 2022 (Doc. 8), are 12 ADOPTED in full. 13 2. The petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice. 14 3. The Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. 15 4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close the case. 16 17 ||IT IS SO ORDERED. 18 || Dated: _ September 7, 2022 ( LAW ph L. wary 19 TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28