Richard Gosztyla v. P. Covello

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: September 10, 2025
• Docket: 2:25-cv-01352
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RICHARD GOSZTYLA, No. 2:25-cv-1352-TLN-AC 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 P. COVELLO, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner Richard Gosztyla (“Petitioner”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed an 18 application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to 19 a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On July 14, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which 21 were served on Petitioner and which contained notice to that any objections to the findings and 22 recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. (ECF No. 8.) Petitioner has not filed 23 objections to the findings and recommendations. 24 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 25 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 26 Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007). The Court has reviewed the file and finds 27 the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s 28 analysis. 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations (ECF No. 8) are ADOPTED in full; 3 2. Petitioner’s application for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed for lack of habeas 4 jurisdiction; 5 3. This court decline to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 U.S.C. 6 § 2253; and 7 4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. 8 Date: September 9, 2025

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28