Case 5:22-cv-00285-SB-PLA Document 24 Filed 08/13/22 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:1389

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 EASTERN DIVISION 11 12 HENRY C. NAVARRO, ) No. ED CV 22-285-SB (PLA) ) 13 Petitioner, ) ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE ) JUDGE’S REPORT AND 14 v. ) RECOMMENDATION ) 15 CONNIE GIPSON, Secretary CDCR, ) ) 16 Respondent. ) ) 17 18 Pursuant to

, the Court has reviewed the Petition for Writ of Habeas 19 Corpus, the other records on file herein, the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation 20 (Report), and the objections to the Report. In his objections, Petitioner concedes that the first 21 two claims do not warrant relief. As for the third claim, the Court agrees with the Magistrate 22 Judge that Petitioner is not entitled to habeas relief. Petitioner’s assertion that the state 23 court’s denial of his Eighth Amendment claim was “objectively unreasonable” is unpersuasive, 24 particularly in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Lockyer v. Andrade,

(2003), 25 as explained in the Report. The fact that Petitioner has now served “several decades of 26 punishment” does not alter this conclusion; rather, it is the anticipated consequence of the 27 sentence imposed in this case (i.e., 25 years to life). The Court accepts the recommendations 28 of the Magistrate Judge. Case 5:22-cv-00285-SB-PLA Document 24 Filed 08/13/22 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:1390

1 ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED: 2 1. The Report and Recommendation is accepted. 3 2. The Motion to Dismiss is granted. 4 3. Judgment shall be entered consistent with this order. 5 4. The clerk shall serve this Order and the Judgment on all counsel or parties of record. 6 7 DATED: August 13, 2022 HONORABLE STANLEY BLUMENFELD, JR. 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2