Gray v. Morris et al

Filing 15

ORDER - IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's 14 Report and Recommendation is ACCEPTED. FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner's 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED; and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge James A Teilborg on 5/27/09. (SAT)

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

William Zane Gray, Petitioner, vs. E.W. Morris, ; et al., Respondents.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. CV 08-1516-PHX-JAT ORDER

Pending before the Court is Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus ("Petition") (Doc. #1). The Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") (Doc. #14) recommending that the Petition be denied and dismissed with prejudice. Neither party has filed objections to the R&R. Accordingly, the Court hereby accepts the R&R. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (finding that district courts are not required to conduct "any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection" (emphasis added)); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) ("statute makes it clear that the district judge must review the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise" (emphasis in original)); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F.Supp.2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003). Accordingly, IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. #14) is ACCEPTED;

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

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. #1) is DENIED; and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. DATED this 27th day of May, 2009.

-2-