(HC) Blount v. Soto, No. 2:2015cv01809 - Document 88 (E.D. Cal. 2023)

Court Description: ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 5/16/2023 ADOPTING in FULL 85 Findings and Recommendations. DENIED 18 Petitioner's motion for a stay under Rhines v. Weber. DENYING The petition for writ of habeas corpus. The court DECLINES to issue the Certificate of Appealability, and the Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. CASE CLOSED(Reader, L)

Download PDF
(HC) Blount v. Soto Doc. 88 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 REGINALD BLOUNT, 12 Petitioner, 13 v. 14 J. SOTO, et al., 15 No. 2:15-cv-1809 KJM AC ORDER Respondents. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed an application for a writ of habeas 18 corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as 19 provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On March 10, 2023, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were 21 served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings 22 and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. ECF No. 85. Neither party filed 23 objections to the findings and recommendations. 24 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 25 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de 26 novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). The court 27 has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record 28 and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Before petitioner can appeal this decision, a certificate of appealability must be issued. 2 See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). Where the petition is denied on the merits, a 3 certificate of appealability may issue under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 “only if the applicant has made a 4 substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). The court 5 finds the petitioner has not made this showing and thus declines to issue a certificate of 6 appealability. 7 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 8 1. The findings and recommendations filed March 10, 2023 (ECF No. 85), are adopted in 9 full; 10 2. Petitioner’s motion for a stay under Rhines v. Weber, ECF No. 18, is denied; 11 3. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied; 12 4. The court declines to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 U.S.C. 13 14 15 § 2253; and 5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. DATED: May 16, 2023. 16 17 18 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.