Case 2:21-cv-04342-SVW-JC Document 11 Filed 02/01/22 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:384

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10 11 NORRIS L. REESE, ) Case No. 2:21-cv-04342-SVW-JC ) 12 ) Petitioner, ) 13 ) ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, v. ) CONCLUSIONS, AND 14 ) RECOMMENDATIONS OF ) UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE 15 RON BROOMFIELD, ) JUDGE ) 16 ) Respondent. ) 17 ________________________________ 18 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition for Writ of 19 Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody (“Petition”) and all of the records 20 herein, including the November 3, 2021 Report and Recommendation of United 21 States Magistrate Judge (“Report and Recommendation”), and petitioner’s 22 objections thereto filed on November 19, 2021 (“Objections”). 23 The Court has made a de novo determination of those portions of the Report 24 and Recommendation to which objection is made. The Court concurs with and 25 accepts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge 26 reflected in the Report and Recommendation, and overrules the Objections. The 27 Court has considered and overruled all of petitioner’s objections and discusses 28 petitioner’s principle objections herein. ase 2:21-cv-04342-SVW-JC Document11 Filed 02/01/22 Page 2of2 Page ID #:38

1 Petitioner objects to the Report and Recommendation, alleging that the 2 || Magistrate Judge erred in finding that his 98-years-to-life sentence is not the 3 || functional equivalent of life without the possibility of parole as would violate 4 || Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012), citing People v. Buffer, 137 N.E. 3d 763, 5 || 774 Cl. 2019) (holding that juvenile offender’s sentence of greater than 40 years 6 || was de facto life sentence in violation of Miller). See Objections at 5-9. Buffer is 7 || not binding on this Court. 8 As the Report and Recommendation explains, the Ninth Circuit squarely 9 || rejected a similar claim that lengthy indeterminate term was the functional 10 || equivalent of life in Demirdjian v. Gipson, 832 F.3d 1060 (9th Cir. 2016), cert. 11 | denied, 138 S. Ct. 71 (2017). See Report and Recommendation at 9-11 (discussing 12 || same). Demirdjian controls in this case. For the reasons explained in the Report 13 | and Recommendation, petitioner has not shown that his sentence violates the 14 | Eighth Amendment. 15 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Petition is denied, this action is 16 || dismissed, and Judgment be entered accordingly. 17 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk serve copies of this Order and 18 || the Judgment herein on petitioner and any counsel for respondent. 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. 20 21 || DATED: February 1, 2022 22 73

26 27 28