Morley v. Elliott et al

Filing 108

ORDER and CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY AND IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS that the Report and Recommendation 76 is accepted. ORDER that the Report and Recommendation 79 is accepted. ORDER that Respondents' Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdictio n (Mootness) 66 is GRANTED. ORDER that the Clerk of the Court enter judgment denying and dismissing petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 1 with prejudice. The Clerk shall terminate this action. Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal are DENIED. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 5/3/11. (TLJ)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Carlos Adrian Morley, Petitioner, 10 11 v. 12 Yolanda Elliott, et al., 13 Respondents. 14 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CV-09-01554-PHX-NVW (LOA) ORDER and CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY AND IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS 15 Pending before the Court is Magistrate Judge Lawrence O. Anderson’s Report and 16 Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc. 79) regarding petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas 17 Corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1), and a second R&R (Doc. 76) regarding 18 respondents’ motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction (Doc. 66). 19 recommends that the Petition be denied and dismissed with prejudice, and second R&R 20 recommends granting the motion to dismiss. The Magistrate Judge advised the parties that 21 they had fourteen days to file objections to the R&R (Doc. 76 at 16 (citing 22 28 U.S.C. § 636(b); Doc. 79 at 38 (same)), and the Court later extended and consolidated the 23 briefing time (Docs. 83, 85, 95). Petitioner filed objections on April 22, 2011. (Docs. 105, 24 106.) The first R&R 25 The Court has considered the objections and reviewed both R&Rs de novo. See Fed. 26 R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that the court must make a de novo 27 determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which specific 28 objections are made). The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s determinations, accepts 1 both recommended decisions within the meaning of Rule 72(b), Fed. R. Civ. P., and 2 overrules Petitioner’s objections. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that the district court 3 “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made 4 by the magistrate”). 5 6 7 8 9 10 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. 76) is accepted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. 79) is accepted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondents’ “Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction (Mootness)” (Doc. 66) is GRANTED. 11 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court enter judgment denying and 12 dismissing petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 13 (Doc. 1) with prejudice. The Clerk shall terminate this action. 14 Having considered the issuance of a Certificate of Appealability from the order 15 denying Petitioner’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, the Court FINDS: Certificate of 16 Appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal are Denied. Petitioner has 17 not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. 18 DATED this 3rd day of May, 2011. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -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?