Terrence King v. Robert Burton

[7] 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA [10] 11 TERRANCE KING, Case No. 5:21-cv-00088-JAK-PD 12 Petitioner, ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT 13 v. AND ADOPTING FINDINGS, 14 CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF 15 ROBERT BURTON, Warden, UNITED STATE 16 Respondent. MAGISTRATE JUDGE, AND DENYING CERTIFICATE OF 17 APPEALABILITY [19] Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 , the Court has reviewed the Petition, the [20] records on file, the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate [21] Judge (“Report”), Petitioner’s Objections to the Report, and the Supplemental [22] Statement of Decision. The Court has engaged in a de novo review of those [23] portions of the Report to which Petitioner has objected. The Court accepts the [24] Report and the Supplemental Statement of Decision and adopts them as its [25] own findings and conclusions. Accordingly, the Petition is dismissed with 26 prejudice. 27 Further, for the reasons stated in the Report and the Supplemental 28 Statement of Decision, the Court finds that Petitioner has not made a 1 substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, and therefore a 2 certificate of appealability is denied. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (c)(2); Fed. R. App. 3 P. 22 (b); Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003). [5] DATED: _N_o_v_e_m__b_er_ _1_8,_ 2_0_2_1_ [6] ______________________________________ 7 JOHN A. KRONSTADT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE