United States District Court, D. Oregon
Anthony D. Bornstein, Federal Public Defender's Office, Portland, Oregon, Attorney for Petitioner.
Kristen E. Boyd, State of Oregon Department of Justice, Salem, Oregon, Attorney for Respondent.
MARCO A. HERNNDEZ, District Judge.
Magistrate Judge Dennis J. Hubel issued a Findings and Recommendation (F&R)  on December 1, 2014, recommending that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus  be denied and that a certificate of appealability be denied because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Petitioner filed timely objections to the F&R. 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 F&R. I have also reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and find no error in the Magistrate Judge's F&R.
The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Hubel's F&R . Accordingly, the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus  is DENIED and a certificate of appealability is DENIED because the Petitioner has not made a ...