Bell v. Salazar

District Court, D. Oregon

Bell v. Salazar

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

TERRO LAJUAN BELL, No. 3:20-cv-0467-JE

Petitioner, ORDER

v.

JOSIAS SALAZAR,

Respondent.

HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge: Magistrate Judge Jelderks issued a Findings and Recommendation [ECF 5] on July 20, 2020, in which he recommends that the Court enter judgment dismissing the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [ECF 1] and decline to issue a certificate of appealability on the basis that Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 2253

(c)(2). The matter is now before the Court pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1)(B) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). Because no objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation were timely filed, the Court is relieved of its obligation to review the record de novo. United States v. Reyna-Tapia,

328 F.3d 1114, 1121

(9th Cir. 2003) (en banc); see also United States v. Bernhardt,

840 F.2d 1441, 1444

(9th Cir. 1988) (de novo review required only for portions of Magistrate Judge’s report to which objections have been made). Having reviewed the legal

principles de novo, the Court finds no error. CONCLUSION The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Jelderk’s Findings and Recommendation [ECF 5]. Accordingly, the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [ECF 1] is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, and the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 2253

(c)(2). IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: _____A_u_g_u_s_t_ _2_1_, _2_0_2_0________.

MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ United States District Judge

Reference

Status
Unknown