Quinzell Hoofbooker v. Theresa Cisneros

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaMarch 5, 20242:22-cv-01028California2,131 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 QUINZELL HOOFBOOKER, C ase No. 2:22-cv-01028-SPG-JDE

12 Petitioner, ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED

13 v. STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14

THERESA CISNEROS,

15

16 Respondent.

17 18 19 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the First Amended Petition for 20 Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody (ECF No. 30 (“Petition”)), the records 21 on file, the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (ECF 22 No. 49 (“Report”)), and Petitioner’s Objections to Report and Recommendations (ECF 23 No. 52 (“Objections”)). The Court has further made de novo determinations as to the 24 portions of the Report to which Petitioner filed objections. 25 The Petition raises eleven grounds for habeas relief. (Pet. at 5–11). The Report 26 recommends denial of the Petition and dismissal of this action with prejudice. (R. & R. 27 28 1 at 55). For the following reasons, Petitioner’s Objections to the…

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.