Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-01005/USCOURTS-casd-3_15-cv-01005-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

,., 

"'.- -,. 

~8T: I:': 

8 

9 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

10 

11 STEVEN DANIEL DEJARLAIS, 

12 Petitioner, 

v. 

Case No.: 15-cv-l005 BEN (MDD) 

ORDER: 

(1) ADOPTING REPORT AND 

RECOMMENDATION; 

(2) DENYING PETITION; 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

AUDREY KING, Warden, et ai., 

Respondent. (3) DENYING CERTIFICATE OF 

APPEALABILITY 

20 On May 5, 2015, Petitioner Steven Daniel DeJarlais filed a Petition for Writ of 

21 Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Docket No. 1.) On July 27, 2015, 

22 Respondent filed an Answer. (Docket No.9.) On October 14, 2015, Magistrate Judge 

23 Dembin issued a thorough and thoughtful Report and Recommendation, recommending 

24 that the Petition be denied. (Docket No. 14.) Petitioner filed an untimely, general 

25 objection. (Docket No. 16.) 

26 I. De Novo Review of Petition 

27 A district judge "may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition" of a 

28 magistrate judge on a dispositive matter. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); see also 28 U.S.C. § 

15cvlO05 

Case 3:15-cv-01005-BEN-MDD Document 17 Filed 12/07/15 Page 1 of 3
1 636(b)(1). Where a proper objection to a report and recommendation has been filed, the 

2 district court reviews de novo those portions of the report or specific proposed findings or 

3 recommendations to which the petitioner objected. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (emphasis 

4 added). A general objection is tantamount to no objection at all. See Alcantara v. 

5 McEwen, No. 12-cv-401-IEG, 2013 WL 4517861, at *1-2 (S.D. Cal. Aug. 15,2013) 

6 (citing Howard v. Sec'y a/Health & Human Servs., 932 F.2d 505,509 (6th Cir. 1991) 

7 ("A general objection to the entirety of the magistrate's report has the same effects as 

8 would a failure to object."); Lockert v. Faulkner, 843 F.2d 1015,1019 (7th Cir. 1988) 

9 ("[A]n objection stating only 'I object' preserves no issue for review."); and Goney v. 

10 Clark, 749 F.2d 5, 7 (3d Cir. 1984)); see also Martin v. Ryan, No. cv-13-381, 2014 WL 

11 5432133, at *2 (D. Ariz. Oct. 24, 2014) (citing United States v. One Parcel of Real Prop., 

12 73 F.3d 1057,1060 (10th Cir. 1996)). 

13 Petitioner filed a general Objection "alleg[ing] the Magistrate[ Judge's] findings of 

14 fact are unreasonable in light ofthe record, when taken as a whole." (Objection 1.) 

15 Petitioner also "incorporate[ d] by reference those facts, claims, and arguments contained 

16 in the 'Petition'." (Objections 1.) 

17 The Court finds Alcantara and the laws of the other circuit courts persuasive. It is 

18 apparent that Petitioner failed to make any specific objections to the Report. Thus, the 

19 Court need not conduct a de novo review. See Garcia v. Subia, No. 07cv1869, 2011 WL 

20 1119181, at *3, *5 (S.D. Cal. Mar. 28, 2011); Sullivan v. Schriro, No. 04-1517, 2006 WL 

21 1516005 (D. Ariz. May 30, 2006). Even still, the Court did perform a de novo review of 

22 the entire record in this matter and fully ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation. 

23 II. Certificate of Appealability 

24 "The district court must issue or deny a certificate of appealability when it enters a 

25 final order adverse to the applicant." Rule 11 foil. 28 U.S.C. § 2254. In this case, the 

26 Court finds that Petitioner did not make a substantial showing of the denial of a 

27 constitutional right, the issues are not debatable among jurists of reason, and a court 

28 could not resolve the issues in a different manner. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 

2 

15cvlO05 

Case 3:15-cv-01005-BEN-MDD Document 17 Filed 12/07/15 Page 2 of 3
• 

1 322, 327 (2003). The Court therefore DENIES a certificate of appealability. 

2 CONCLUSION 

3 Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS in full the Report and Recommendation. The 

4 Petition is DENIED. The Court DENIES a certificate of appealability. The Clerk shall 

5 enter judgment denying the Petition. 

6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

Dated: December a, 2015 

Hon. Roger T. Benitez 

United states District Judge 

3 

15cvl005 

Case 3:15-cv-01005-BEN-MDD Document 17 Filed 12/07/15 Page 3 of 3