Jesse Andrew Arredondo v. W. L. Montgomery

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JESSE ANDREW ARREDONDO, ) Case No. CV 17-0998-FMO (JPR) 11 ) Petitioner, ) ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND 12 ) RECOMMENDATIONS OF U.S. v. ) MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13 ) W.L. MONTGOMERY, Warden, ) 14 ) Respondent. ) 15 ) ) 16 The Court has reviewed the Petition, records on file, and Report and Recommendation of U.S. Magistrate Judge, which recommends that judgment be entered denying the Petition and dismissing this action with prejudice. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On February 18, 2020, Petitioner filed Objections to the R. & R., in which he mostly simply repeats arguments from his Petition and Reply. For instance, Petitioner continues to argue that the trial court deprived him of due process when it permitted Erin Glenn to testify that she pleaded guilty to two felonies in connection with his case. (See Objs. at 2-7.) He takes issue (see id. at 3) with the Magistrate Judge’s observation that habeas relief is 1 not warranted because the “Supreme Court has never specifically addressed…