From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lee v. Ortiz

United States District Court, D. Colorado
Aug 6, 2007
Civil Case No. 06-cv-00705-LTB-MEH (D. Colo. Aug. 6, 2007)

Opinion

Civil Case No. 06-cv-00705-LTB-MEH.

August 6, 2007


ORDER


This case is before me on the recommendation of the magistrate judge that the Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Docket No. 5) be denied and the case dismissed with prejudice. The recommendation was issued and served on May 24, 2007. The applicant has now filed timely written objections to the magistrate judge's recommendation. The recommendation has, therefore, been reviewed de novo.

To summarily state the underlying factual circumstances for the offenses upon which applicant suffered State convictions, the magistrate judge pursuant to F.R.E. 201 took judicial notice of an order issued by District Judge Marcia S. Krieger denying habeas relief to applicant's co-defendant and brother in Lee v. Wakins, No. 03-72, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44501 (D.Colo. Nov.7, 2005); 03-cv-00072-MSK-PAC, Dock. #57. Applicant objects that the magistrate judge's findings in this case are based upon another judge's evaluation of his co-defendant and is not an independent evaluation of the record to reach the merits of this applicant's claims. First, I conclude that a judicial officer of this court can take judicial notice of the files and records in cases filed in this court pursuant to F.R.E. 201. Second, it is apparent that the magistrate judge did so summarily only to reflect the general context of trial before the Colorado State Court and reviewed by the Colorado Court of Appeals. Most importantly, on de novo review and upon review of the magistrate judge's comprehensive evaluation of applicant's claims, it is apparent that the magistrate judge reviewed the claims on the basis of the record before the Colorado State Courts. Having considered applicant's remaining objections de novo in light of the record in this case, I conclude that the magistrate judge's recommendation is correct. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the application is DENIED and the above action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.


Summaries of

Lee v. Ortiz

United States District Court, D. Colorado
Aug 6, 2007
Civil Case No. 06-cv-00705-LTB-MEH (D. Colo. Aug. 6, 2007)
Case details for

Lee v. Ortiz

Case Details

Full title:BRIAN LEE, Applicant, v. JOE ORTIZ, Executive Director, Colorado…

Court:United States District Court, D. Colorado

Date published: Aug 6, 2007

Citations

Civil Case No. 06-cv-00705-LTB-MEH (D. Colo. Aug. 6, 2007)

Citing Cases

Barajas v. Falk

Consequently, Applicant fails to assert a claim for federal habeas relief as to his second claim and it is…