Christopher Grimes v. Brian Kibler

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CHRISTOPHER GRIMES, Case No. 2:21-cv-05735-MWF-PD 12 Petitioner, AMENDED ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND 13 v. ADOPTING, FINDINGS, 14 CONCLUSIONS, AND BRIAN KIBLER, Warden, RECOMMENDATIONS OF Respondent. UNITED STATES 16 MAGISTRATE JUDGE, AND DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition, the records on file, the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge (“Report”), the Objections to the Report, the video lodged by Petitioner, and the Supplemental Statement of Decision. The Court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report to which Petitioner has objected.

Having viewed the video lodged by Petitioner, the Court concludes that it does not show that any finding of fact made by the California Court of Appeal regarding the events depicted in the video was erroneous. The Court accepts ! || the Report and the Supplemental Statement of Decision and adopts them as || its own findings and conclusions.

3 Further, the Court finds that Petitioner has not made a substantial || showing of the denial of a constitutional right or that the court erred in its || procedural ruling and, therefore, a certificate of appealability will not issue in || this action. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); Miller-El v. || Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2008); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 4738, 484 || (2000). Accordingly, the Petition is denied with prejudice.

10 DATED: December 9, 2021 12 ‘ 8 UNITED STATES DISRRICT JUDGE