(HC) Bland v. Warden

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSHUA DAVIS BLAND, No. 2:25-cv-2802 DJC CSK P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 KELLY SANTORO, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed an application for a writ of 18 habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United 19 States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On March 9, 2026, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations 21 herein which were served on petitioner and which contained notice to Petitioner that 22 any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen 23 days. Petitioner did not file objections to the findings and recommendations. 24 The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United 25 States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The Magistrate Judge’s conclusions of law 26 are reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 27 (9th Cir. 1983). Having reviewed the file, the Court finds the findings and 28 recommendations to be supported by the record and by the Magistrate Judge’s 1 | analysis. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. The findings and recommendations (ECF No. 6) are adopted in full. 4 2. Petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus is summarily dismissed. 5 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. 6 4. The Court declines to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 7 | U.S.C. § 2253. 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 | Dated: _ April 23, 2026 “Daniel CoD tto— Hon. Daniel It |. Cod " UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 12 13. | polan25ev2802.800.he 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28