Nelson v. Schriro et al

Filing 12

ORDER - IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's 11 Report and Recommendation is accepted and adopted by the Court. FURTHER ORDERED that the petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is denied and that this action is dismissed with prejudice as time-barred. Signed by Judge Paul G Rosenblatt on 10/23/08. (SAT)

Download PDF
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 WO IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Earl V. Nelson, vs. Petitioner, Dora B. Schriro, et al., Respondents. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CV-07-1011-PHX-PGR (ECV) ORDER Having reviewed de novo the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Voss notwithstanding that no party has filed any objection to the Report and Recommendation, the Court finds that the Magistrate Judge correctly determined that this habeas action must be dismissed as untimely under 28 U.S.C. 2244(d)(1)(A) because the petitioner filed this action nearly six years after the applicable limitations period expired. Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (doc. #11) is accepted and adopted by the Court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254 is denied and / / / / / / 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 that this action is dismissed with prejudice as time-barred. DATED this 23rd day of October, 2008. -2-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?