Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_16-cv-01761/USCOURTS-casd-3_16-cv-01761-1/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 

[Case No.]

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

PABLO S. JIMENEZ, 

Petitioner,

v. 

CYNTHIA Y. TAMPKINS, 

Respondent.

 Case No.: 16cv1761-MMA (KSC) 

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND 

RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED 

STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE; 

[Doc. No. 28] 

OVERRULING PETITIONER’S 

OBJECTIONS;

[Doc. No. 30] 

DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT 

OF HABEAS CORPUS; 

[Doc. No. 1] 

DECLINING TO ISSUE 

CERTIFICATE OF 

APPEALABILITY 

 Petitioner Pablo S. Jimenez, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a Petition 

for Writ of Habeas Corpus (“petition”) pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, section 

2254, challenging his 2015 conviction for assault and battery causing great bodily injury 

Case 3:16-cv-01761-MMA-KSC Document 31 Filed 12/06/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 3
2 

[Case No.]

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

to the victim. See Doc. No. 1. The Court referred the matter to United States Magistrate 

Judge Karen S. Crawford for preparation of a Report and Recommendation pursuant to 

Title 28, section 636(b)(1), and Civil Local Rule HC.2. Judge Crawford has issued a 

thorough and well-reasoned Report recommending that all relief requested by Petitioner 

be denied. See Doc. No. 28. Petitioner generally objects to the Report and 

Recommendation, asserting arguments previously raised in his Traverse. See Doc. No. 

30. 

 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72 and Title 28, section 636(b)(1), the 

Court must “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report . . . to which 

objection is made,” and “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings 

or recommendations made by the magistrate [judge].” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also 

United States v. Remsing, 874 F.2d 614, 617 (9th Cir. 1989). The Court has conducted a

de novo review of the entire record and finds Petitioner’s objections to be without merit. 

 Accordingly, the Court concludes that Judge Crawford issued an accurate Report 

and well-reasoned recommendation that the petition be denied. The Court 

OVERRULES Petitioner’s objections and ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation in 

its entirety. The Court DENIES the petition with prejudice. 

CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

 Rule 11 of the Federal Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases states that “the 

district court must issue or deny a certificate of appealability when it enters a final order 

adverse to the applicant.” A certificate of appealability is not issued unless there is “a 

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). 

Under this standard, a petitioner must show that reasonable jurists could debate whether 

the petition should have been resolved in a different manner or that the issues presented 

were adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 

537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)). For 

the reasons set forth in the Report and Recommendation and incorporated by reference 

Case 3:16-cv-01761-MMA-KSC Document 31 Filed 12/06/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 3
3 

[Case No.]

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

herein, the Court finds that this standard has not been met and therefore DECLINES to 

issue a certificate of appealability in this case. 

 The Court DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to enter judgment accordingly and close 

the case. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATE: December 6, 2018 _______________________________________

 HON. MICHAEL M. ANELLO 

 United States District Judge 

Case 3:16-cv-01761-MMA-KSC Document 31 Filed 12/06/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 3