The opinion
1 O
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
Case No. CV 17-695 CAS (MRW)
12 MARCELINO MORENO,
13 Petitioner,
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS
14 v. AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE
15 JOHN GARZA, Warden, JUDGE
16 Respondent.
17
18
19 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court reviewed the petition, the records
20 on file, and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate
21 Judge. Further, the Court engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the
22 Report to which Petitioner objected. The Court accepts the findings and
23 recommendation of the Magistrate Judge.
24 The Court expressly exercises its discretion to consider, and reject,
25 Petitioner’s argument (first asserted in his objections (Docket # 25)) regarding
26 the alleged mistaken identity with another defendant / inmate. United States v.
27 Howell, 231 F.3d 615, 621-22 (9th Cir. 2000); Brown v. Roe, 279 F.3d 742,
28 745 (9th Cir. 2002). The Court concludes that Petitioner’s contention is
1 | unrelated to the constitutional claims for relief asserted in the petition, and
2 | cannot serve to restart the AEDPA limitations period.
3 IT IS ORDERED that Judgment be entered dismissing this action with
4 | prejudice.
5
7 DATE: February 28, 2018
HON. CHRISTINA A. SNYDER
8 SENIOR U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28