1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JUAN DIONICIO CASTRO, Case No. 8:18-cv-00867-DMG-MAA

12 Petitioner, ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT 13 v. AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE 14 J. ROBERTSON, JUDGE 15 Respondent. 16 17 Pursuant to

, the Court has reviewed the Petition for Writ of 18 Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody (“Petition”), the other records on file 19 herein, and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. 20 The Court also has reviewed Petitioner’s objections to the Report and 21 Recommendation, which the Court received and filed on November 12, 2020 22 (“Objections”). (Objs., ECF No. 21.) As required by Federal Rule of Civil 23 Procedure 72(b)(3), the Court has engaged in de novo review of the portions of the 24 Report and Recommendation to which Petitioner specifically has objected. 25 Petitioner objects to portions of the factual summary in the Report and 26 Recommendation. (Objs. 2–7; see Rep. & Recommendation, ECF No. 19, at 3–10.) 27 However, a factual summary from a state appellate court’s opinion is entitled to a 28 1 || presumption of correctness under

(e)(1) that may be rebutted only 2 || by clear and convincing evidence that the facts were otherwise. See Moses v. 3 || Payne,

, 746 n.1 (9th Cir. 2009) (citation omitted). Although 4 || Petitioner now challenges aspects of the California Court of Appeal’s factual 5 || summary, he has not adduced clear and convincing evidence that this summary is 6 || incorrect. (See Objs. 2-7.) 7 Next, Petitioner reasserts the nine grounds for habeas relief he raised in his 8 || Petition without alleging any specific errors in the Report and Recommendation. 9 || (Objs. 7-13; see Pet., ECF No. 1, at S—6, 14-41.) The Objections lack merit for the 10 || reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation. (Rep. & Recommendation 14— 11 || 46.) The Court finds no defect of law, fact, or logic in the Report and 12 || Recommendation. The Court concurs with and accepts the findings, conclusions, 13 || and recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge, and overrules the 14 || Objections. 15 IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that (1) the Report and Recommendation of 16 || the Magistrate Judge is accepted; and (2) Judgment shall be entered denying the 17 || Petition and dismissing this action with prejudice. 18 19 | DATED: March 22,2021 20 ptt, fn , ka 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28