Barrera-Flores v. Schomig et al
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 41 as the order of this Court. That the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied and directing the Clerk to enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge Susan R Bolton on 6/16/10. (DMT)
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 vs. James Schomig, et al. Respondents. Andres Barrera-Flores, Petitioner,
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
No. CV09-0481-PHX-SRB ORDER
Petitioner filed his First Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 on June 3, 2009 claiming "his prolonged detention is a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) and violates his right to due process guarantees by the 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution." On March 31, 2010, Respondents filed Response to the Amended Petitioner for Writ of Habeas Corpus. No reply was filed. On May 24, 2010, the Magistrate Judge issued her Report and Recommendation recommending that the amended petition be denied. In her Report and Recommendation the Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they had 14 days from the date of service of a copy of the Report and Recommendation within which to file specific written objections with the Court. The time to file such objections has expired and no objections to the Report and Recommendation have been filed. The Court finds itself in agreement with the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge.
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 ORDERED adopting the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as the order of this Court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk to enter judgment accordingly.
DATED this 16th day of June, 2010.
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?