1 2 3 4 5

6

7

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10 EDDIE TURNER, ) NO. CV 20-0830-AB (KS) 11 Petitioner, ) 12 ) v. ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND ) 13 ) RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED 14 RALPH M. DIAZ, Warden, ) STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE ) 15 Respondent. ) 16 _________________________________ ) 17 18 Pursuant to

, the Court has reviewed the operative Petition for Writ of 19 Habeas Corpus (the “Petition”), all the records herein, and the Report and Recommendation 20 of United States Magistrate Judge (“Report”). Further, the Court has engaged in a de novo 21 review of those portions of the Report to which Petitioner has raised objections (“Objections”) 22 (Dkt. No. 54) as well as his renewed request for an evidentiary hearing (Dkt. No. 49). 23 24 Most significantly, Petitioner asserts that the Court “looked through” the California 25 Supreme Court’s decision to the wrong decision by the California Court of Appeal. (See 26 Objections at 4-7.) Specifically, Petitioner contends that the Court should have “looked 27 through” the California Supreme Court’s decision to the California Court of Appeal’s decision 28 in Turner v. Bank of Am. Corp., No. B247883,

(Jul. 21, 1 2015) rather than to the California Court of Appeal’s decision in People v. Turner, No. 2 B272452,

(Jul. 22, 2019). However, Turner v. Bank of 3 Am. Corp., No. B247883, was a civil case between Petitioner and Bank of America. Therefore, 4 the Court finds no error. For the purposes of this habeas proceeding, the Court properly looked 5 through the California Supreme Court’s decision to the Court of Appeal’s decision in case 6 number B272452, which concerned the criminal conviction at issue. 7 8 The Court finds Petitioner’s other objections equally unavailing. Further, it finds that 9 Petitioner’s renewed request for an evidentiary hearing should be denied for the reasons stated 10 in the Report. Having completed its review, the Court accepts the findings and 11 recommendations set forth in the Report. 12 13 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: (1) the Petition is denied; and (2) Judgment shall 14 be entered dismissing this action with prejudice. 15 16 DATED: June 15, 2021

17 ___________________________________ 18 ANDRÉ BIROTTE, JR. 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28