(HC) Smith v. Espinoza ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ASHLEIGH SMITH, No. 2:18-cv-2877 DJC AC P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 J. ESPINOZA, Warden, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed an application for a writ of 18 habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United 19 States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On June 5, 2023, the Magistrate Judge issued findings and recommendations 21 herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that 22 any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty- 23 one days. ECF No. 15. Neither party has filed objections to the findings and 24 recommendations. 25 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United 26 States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The Magistrate Judge’s conclusions of law 27 are reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 28 (9th Cir. 1983). The Court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and 1 | recommendations to be supported by the record and by the Magistrate Judge’s 2 | analysis. 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 4 1. The findings and recommendations filed June 5, 2023 (ECF No. 15), are 5 | ADOPTED IN FULL; 6 2. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is DENIED, and 7 3. The Court declines to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 8 | U.S.C. § 2253 as Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a 9 | constitutional right. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). 10 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. 12 | Dated: _ September 3, 2023 Bek | Cbabeatin.. Hon. Daniel labretta 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 | smit2877.801.hc 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28