(HC)Hill v. Robertson, No. 2:2020cv01998 - Document 20 (E.D. Cal. 2023)

Court Description: ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 5/10/23 ADOPTING in full 14 Findings and Recommendations and DENYING Petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The Court DECLINES to issue the certificate of appealability. CASE CLOSED (Kastilahn, A)

Download PDF
(HC)Hill v. Robertson Doc. 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 D’VAUGHN CORTEZ HILL, 12 No. 2:20-cv-1998-TLN-DB Petitioner, 13 v. 14 J. ROBERTSON, 15 ORDER Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this application for a writ of habeas 18 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge 19 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On September 29, 2022, 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. After receiving an 23 extension of time to do so, petitioner filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 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 September 29, 2022, are ADOPTED IN 3 FULL; 4 2. Petitioner’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DENIED; and 5 3. The Court declines to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 U.S.C. 6 §2253. 7 DATE: May 10, 2023 8 Troy L. Nunley United States District Judge 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.