Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Drollinger v. Nooth

United States District Court, D. Oregon

February 4, 2015

KEITH L. DROLLINGER, Petitioner,
v.
MARK NOOTH, Respondent.

ORDER

MARCO A. HERNANDEZ, District Judge.

Magistrate Judge Stewart issued a Findings & Recommendation (#44) on December 4, 2014, in which she recommends the Court dismiss Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and decline to issue a Certificate of Appealability. Petitioner has timely filed objections to the Findings & 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 & 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 there is no basis to modify the Findings & Recommendation. I have also reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and find no other errors in the Magistrate Judge's Findings & Recommendation.

CONCLUSION

The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Stewart's Findings & Recommendation [44], and therefore, Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [2] is dismissed. Because Petitioner fails to make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), the Court declines to issue a Certificate of Appealability.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.