(HC) Smith v. Harris ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 PAUL GORDON SMITH, JR., No. 2:16-cv-01015-TLN-CKD 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 TRENT ALLEN, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas 18 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 19 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On August 9, 2022, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 21 which were served upon the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the findings 22 and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 27.) Neither party has 23 filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 24 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 25 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 26 See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). 27 Having reviewed the file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be 28 supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The Findings and Recommendations filed August 9, 2022 (ECF No. 27) are 3 | ADOPTED in full. 4 2. Petitioner’s Petition for a writ of habeas corpus (ECF No. 1) is DENIED. 5 3. This case is closed. 6 4. The Court declines to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 U.S.C. 7 § 2253. 8 | DATED: September 21, 2022 ( f 10 Troy L. Nunley United States District Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28