(HC) Hicks v. Burton, No. 2:2018cv02237 - Document 35 (E.D. Cal. 2021)

Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 11/22/2021 ADOPTING IN FULL 33 Findings and Recommendations. Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus is DENIED. The Court DECLINES to issue a certificate of appealability. CASE CLOSED. (Rodriguez, E)

Download PDF
(HC) Hicks v. Burton Doc. 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CLIFTON ROBERT HICKS, 12 Petitioner, 13 14 v. No. 2:18-cv-02237 JAM DB P ORDER ROBERT BURTON, 15 Respondent. 16 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this application for a writ of habeas 17 18 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 19 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On August 10, 2021, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 20 21 which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to 22 the findings and recommendations were to be filed within thirty days. (ECF No. 33.) Petitioner 23 has filed objections to the findings and recommendations. (ECF No. 34.) In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 24 25 court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the 26 court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper 27 analysis. 28 //// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed August 10, 2021 (ECF No. 33) are 3 ADOPTED in full; 4 2. Petitioner’s petition for writ of habeas corpus is DENIED; 5 3. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to close this case; and 6 4. The Court DECLINES to issue a certificate of appealability. 7 8 9 Dated: November 22, 2021 10 /s/ John A. Mendez THE HONORABLE JOHN A. MENDEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 /hick2237.805.hc 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.