(HC) Abuanbar v. Peery ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANTHONY LEWIS ABUANBAR, Case No. 2:21-cv-00347-KJM-JDP (HC) 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 S. PEERY, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this application for a writ of habeas 18 corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as 19 provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On May 15, 2023, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were 21 served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings 22 and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party has filed objections. 23 Although it appears from the file that petitioner’s copy of the findings and recommendations was 24 returned as undeliverable, petitioner was properly served. It is petitioner’s responsibility to keep 25 the court apprised of his current address at all times. Under Local Rule 182(f), service of 26 documents at the record address of the party is fully effective. 27 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 28 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed 1 || denovo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law 2 || by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court 3 || ....”). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be 4 || supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 5 Before petitioner can appeal this decision, a certificate of appealability must be issued. 6 || See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). Where the petition is denied on the merits, a 7 || certificate of appealability may issue under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 “only if the applicant has made a 8 | substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). The court 9 || finds the petitioner has not made this showing and thus declines to issue a certificate of 10 | appealability. 11 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 12 1. The findings and recommendations filed May 15, 2023, are adopted in full. 13 2. The petition, ECF No. 2, is denied. 14 3. The court declines to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 U.S.C. § 2253. 16 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case and to enter judgment accordingly. 17 | DATED: July 27, 2023. 18 50 CHIEF ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28