(HC) Vaughn v. Diaz, No. 1:2012cv01231 - Document 49 (E.D. Cal. 2014)

Court Description: ORDER RE: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 47 ; ORDER DENYING Petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration and Request for an Evidentiary Hearing 34 ; ORDER DECLINING TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY; ORDER DIRECTING the Clerk to Send a Copy of This Order to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 11/20/14. (Hellings, J)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 11 RAY LEE VAUGHN, Case No. 1:12-cv-01231-LJO-BAM-HC 12 ORDER RE: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. 47) Petitioner, 13 14 ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND REQUEST FOR AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING (DOC. 34) v. 15 16 17 RALPH M. DIAZ, Warden, Respondent. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER DECLINING TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK TO SEND A COPY OF THIS ORDER TO THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS Petitioner is a state prisoner who proceeded pro se and in forma pauperis with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rules 302 through 304. On October 1, 2014, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations to deny Petitioner’s request for an evidentiary hearing, deny Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration, and decline to issue a certificate of appealablity. The findings and recommendations were served on all parties on the same date. The findings and recommendations advised the parties that objections 1 1 could be filed within thirty days and replies within fourteen days 2 after the filing of objections. 3 filed objections. On October 23, 2014, Petitioner Although over fourteen days have passed since the 4 filing of objections, no reply to the objections has been filed. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), 5 6 this Court has conducted a de novo review of the case. The 7 undersigned has carefully reviewed the entire file and has 8 considered the objections; the undersigned has determined there is 9 no need to modify the findings and recommendations based on the 10 points raised in the objections. The Court finds that the report 11 and recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Further, because the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has 12 13 suspended consideration of Petitioner’s pending appeal in case 14 number 13-16773 until Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration is 15 ruled upon by this Court, the Clerk will be directed to send a copy 16 of this order to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. 17 Accordingly, it is ORDERED that: 18 1. The findings and recommendations filed on October 1, 2014, 19 are ADOPTED in full; and 20 2. Petitioner’s request for an evidentiary hearing is DENIED; 21 and 3. Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration is DENIED; and 22 4. The Court DECLINES to issue a certificate of appealability; 23 and 5. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to send a copy of this 24 order to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. 25 26 IT IS SO ORDERED. 27 28 Dated: /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill November 20, 2014 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.