Rudy E. Vasquez v. M. E. Spearman, No. 2:2016cv06333 - Document 28 (C.D. Cal. 2017)

Court Description: ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Judge Josephine L. Staton for Report and Recommendation (Issued), 21 . IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that Judgment be entered denying the Petition and dismissing this action with prejudice. (bem)

Download PDF
Rudy E. Vasquez v. M. E. Spearman Doc. 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RUDY E. VASQUEZ, Petitioner, 12 v. 13 14 M.E. SPEARMAN, Warden, Respondent. 15 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. CV 16-6333-JLS (JPR) ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE 16 17 The Court has reviewed the Petition, records on file, and 18 Report and Recommendation of U.S. Magistrate Judge. 19 U.S.C. § 636. 20 the R. & R., in which he mostly simply repeats arguments from the 21 Petition. 22 aiding-and-abetting theory, as the Magistrate Judge posited (R. & 23 R. at 10-11), he was not convicted of it instead of second-degree 24 murder. 25 Penal Code sections 30, 31, and 971, state law does not 26 distinguish between principals and aiders and abettors. 27 persons concerned in the commission of a crime, whether it be 28 felony or misdemeanor, and whether they directly commit the act See 28 On July 27, 2017, Petitioner filed objections to He does ask, however, why, if he was prosecuted on an (Objs. at 3.) The answer is simple: under California “All 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 constituting the offense, or aid and abet its commission . . . 2 are principals in any crime so committed.” 3 (“[A]ll persons concerned in the commission of a crime, who by 4 the operation of other provisions of this code are principals 5 therein, shall hereafter be prosecuted, tried and punished as 6 principals and no other facts need be alleged in any accusatory 7 pleading against any such person than are required in an 8 accusatory pleading against a principal.”) 9 objections are not well taken. 10 § 31; see also § 971 Petitioner’s Having made a de novo determination of those portions of the 11 R. & R. to which Petitioner objected, the Court accepts the 12 findings and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. 13 14 IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that Judgment be entered denying the Petition and dismissing this action with prejudice. 15 16 17 18 DATED: September 10, 2017 JOSEPHINE L. STATON U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.