Bundy v. Nooth

Full title: HENRY EDWARD BUNDY, Petitioner, v. MARK NOOTH, Respondent.

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

Date published: Nov 25, 2014

2:12-CV-01530-PK (D. Or. Nov. 25, 2014)

Opinion

2:12-CV-01530-PK

11-25-2014

HENRY EDWARD BUNDY, Petitioner, v. MARK NOOTH, Respondent.

BROWN, Judge.

ORDER

Magistrate Judge Paul Papak issued Findings and Recommendation (#46) on September 17, 2014, in which he recommends the Court deny Petitioner Henry Edward Bundy's Petition (#1) for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, dismiss this matter with prejudice, and deny a certificate of appealability. Petitioner filed timely Objections to the Findings and Recommendation. The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).

When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge's report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). See also Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9^th Cir. 2009); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9^th Cir. 2003)(en banc).

In his Objections Petitioner reiterates the arguments contained in his Petition and Memorandum in Support of Petition. This Court has carefully considered Petitioner's Objections and concludes they do not provide a basis to modify the Findings and Recommendation. The Court also has reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and does not find any error in the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation.

CONCLUSION

The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Papak's Findings and Recommendation (#46), DENIES the Petition (#1) for Writ of Habeas Corpus, DISMISSES this matter with prejudice, and DENIES a certificate of appealability.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 25^th day of November, 2014.

/s/ Anna J. Brown

ANNA J. BROWN

United States District Judge