Parker v. Stems et al
Filing
17
ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 16 . Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 1 is denied and dismissed with prejudice as untimely. Petitioner's Motion to Stay 9 is denied and a certificate of appealability is denied b ecause denial of the Petition is based on a plain procedural bar and jurists of reason would not find this Court's procedural ruling debatable. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment of dismissal with prejudice Signed by Judge James A Teilborg on 8/15/11. (TLJ)
1
WO
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
8
9
Keith T. Parker,
Plaintiff,
10
11
vs.
12
Warden J. Stems; et al.,
13
Defendants.
14
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. CV 10-2616-PHX-JAT
ORDER
15
16
Pending before the Court is Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
17
(“Petition”) (Doc. 1). The Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”)
18
(Doc. 16) recommending that the Petition be denied as untimely.
19
Neither party has filed objections to the R&R. Accordingly, the Court hereby accepts
20
the R&R. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (finding that district courts are not
21
required to conduct “any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection”
22
(emphasis added)); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en
23
banc) (“statute makes it clear that the district judge must review the magistrate judge’s
24
findings and recommendations de novo if objection is made, but not otherwise” (emphasis
25
in original)); see also Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F.Supp.2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003).
26
Based on the foregoing,
27
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and
28
Recommendation (Doc. 16) is ACCEPTED; accordingly,
1
•
2
3
with prejudice as untimely,
•
4
5
Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is denied and dismissed
because the Petition is untimely and a stay would not change the timeliness of the
Petition, Petitioner’s motion to stay (Doc. 9) is denied,
•
in the event Petitioner files an appeal, issuance of a certificate of appealability is
6
denied because denial of the Petition is based on a plain procedural bar and jurists
7
of reason would not find this Court’s procedural ruling debatable. See Slack v.
8
McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000), and
9
10
•
the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment of dismissal with prejudice.
DATED this 15th day of August, 2011.
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
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?