Murphy v. Laney

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

ROBERT DOYLE MURPHY, No. 6:19-cv-01185-JR

Petitioner, ORDER

v.

GARRETT LANEY,

Respondent.

HERNÁNDEZ, District Judge: Magistrate Judge Russo issued a Findings and Recommendation on November 3, 2020, in which she recommends that the Court deny the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and enter a judgment of dismissal. F&R, ECF 20. 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 Russo’s Findings and Recommendation [20]. Accordingly, the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED and this case is dismissed with prejudice. A certificate of appealability is denied because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: ___F__e_b_ru__a_ry_ _1_6_,_ 2_0_2__1_______.

MARCO A. HERNÁNDEZ United States District Judge