Siddiqi v. Hendrix

District Court, D. Oregon

Siddiqi v. Hendrix

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

MUHAMMAD SIDDIQI, No. 3:22-cv-00575-JE

Petitioner, ORDER

v.

DEWAYNE HENDRIX,

Respondent.

HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge: Magistrate Judge Jelderks issued a Findings and Recommendation on September 20, 2022, in which he recommends that the Court deny Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. F&R, ECF 5. 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 Jelderks’s Findings and Recommendation [5]. Accordingly, Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [1] is DENIED. The Court declines 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). IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: _____N_o_v_e_m__b_e_r_ 1_,_ _2_0_2_2______.

MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ United States District Judge

Reference

Status
Unknown