(HC) Orozco v. Sullivan, No. 2:2019cv02296 - Document 28 (E.D. Cal. 2021)

Court Description: ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 7/12/21 ADOPTING in full 21 Findings and Recommendations and DENYING Petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Petitioner's 23 application for a certificate of appealability is DENIED. (Kastilahn, A) CASE CLOSED. Modified on 7/12/2021 (Kastilahn, A).

Download PDF
(HC) Orozco v. Sullivan Doc. 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 HECTOR OROZCO, 12 Petitioner, 13 14 No. 2:19-cv-2296 KJM DB P v. ORDER WILLIAM SULLIVAN, 15 Respondent. 16 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this application for a writ of habeas 17 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 May 18, 2020, 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 fourteen days. Petitioner has filed objections to the 23 findings and recommendations. Petitioner has also filed an application for a certificate of 24 appealability pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253. 25 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 26 court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having reviewed the file, the court finds the 27 findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis. 28 ///// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The findings and recommendations filed May 18, 2020, are adopted in full; 3 2. Petitioner’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus is denied; and 4 3. Petitioner’s application for a certificate of appealability (ECF No. 23) is denied for the 5 reasons set forth in the findings and recommendations. 6 DATED: July 12, 2021. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 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.