Johnston v. Laney, No. 6:2018cv00495 - Document 43 (D. Or. 2019)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER. Upon review, I agree with Judge You's recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R 33 in full. I DENY Petitioner's writ of habeas corpus and DISMISS the case with prejudice. Further, because petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability is DENIED. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed on 10/18/2019 by Chief Judge Michael W. Mosman. (pvh)

Download PDF
Johnston v. Laney Doc. 43 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON JON QUINTIN JOHNSTON, an individual, Petitioner, Case No. 6:18-cv-00495-YY V. OPINION AND ORDER GARRETT LANEY, Superintendent, Oregon State Correctional Institution, Respondent. MOSMAN,J., On September 11, 2019, Magistrate Judge Youlee Yim You issued her Findings and Recommendation ("F&R") [33], recommending that Petitioner's writ of habeas corpus be denied. Petitioner objected [35], and Respondent filed a response to the objection [40]. 1 DISCUSSION The magistrate judge makes only recommendations to the court, to which any party may file written objections. The court is not bound by the recommendations of the magistrate judge, but retains responsibility for making the final determination. The court is generally required to make a de novo determination regarding those portions of the report or specified findings or recommendation as to which an objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(C). However, the 1 Petitioner also filed supplemental briefing in support of his objection [41], and Respondent filed a supplemental response [42]. 1 - OPINION AND ORDER Dockets.Justia.com court is not required to review, de novo or under any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the F&R to which no objections are addressed. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). While the level of scrutiny under which I am required to review the F&R depends on whether or not objections have been filed, in either case, I am free to accept, reject, or modify any part of the F&R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(C). CONCLUSION Upon review, I agree with Judge You's recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R [33] in full. I DENY Petitioner's writ of habeas corpus and DISMISS the case with prejudice. Further, because petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability is DENIED. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this J1L day of October, 2019. 2 - OPINION AND ORDER

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.