United States District Court, D. Oregon
July 28, 2014
DANIEL KESTER, Petitioner,
JEFF PREMO, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary, Respondent.
Kristina S. Hellman Federal Public Defender's Office Portland, OR, Attorney for Petitioner.
Kristen E. Boyd State of Oregon Department of Justice Salem, OR, Attorney for Respondent.
MARCO A. HERNNDEZ, District Judge.
Magistrate Judge Hubel issued a Findings and Recommendation  on June 19, 2014, in which he recommends that the Court deny Petitioner's amended habeas petition . Petitioner timely filed objections to the Findings and Recommendation. The matter is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).
When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge's report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Dawson v. Marshall , 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9th Cir. 2009); United States v. Reyna-Tapia , 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc).
I have carefully considered Petitioner's objections and conclude that the objections do not provide a basis to modify the recommendation. I have also reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and find no error in the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation.
The Court adopts Magistrate Judge Hubel's Findings and Recommendation . Therefore, Petitioner's amended habeas petition  is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.