Larsen

Larsen v. Adams

Good Law
718 F. Supp. 2d 1201·2010 WL 2488992·2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61193
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaJune 14, 2010CV 08-04610 CAS (SS)California16,132 words

Opinion

Opinion

Snyder, J.

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 , the Court has reviewed the First Amended Petition, all of the records and files herein, the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, Respondent’s Objections (“Objections”) and Petitioner’s Response to Respondent’s Objections. After having made a de novo determination of the portions of the Report and Recommendation to which Objections were directed, the Court concurs with and adopts the findings, conclusions and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. However, the Court addresses Respondent’s Objections below.

Respondent objects that the Magistrate Judge’s April 27, 2010 Report and Recommendation (“April 27 R & R”) relied on hearsay, specifically “the untested declarations of Petitioner, Jorji Owen, and William Hewitt.” (See Objections at 2). Regarding the declarations of Owen and Hewitt, Respondent complains that (1) “the [April 27] R & R recites the contents of Owen’s and Hewitt’s declaration^]”; and (2) “in finding the prejudice prong of ineffective assistance of counsel to have been met, the [April 27] R & R relied on the Magistrate Judge’s previous…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.