White v. Ryan et al

Filing 28

ORDER ACCEPTING 22 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Aspey. Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Clerk shall TERMINATE this action. In the event Petitioner files an appeal, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability because reasonable jurists would not find the Court's procedural ruling debatable. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 3/27/12. (LSP)

Download PDF
1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Boy White, Petitioner, 10 11 vs. 12 Director Charles Ryan, et al., Respondents. 13 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CV 11-2126-PHX-GMS ORDER 14 15 Pending before the Court are Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and 16 United States Magistrate Judge Aspey’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”). Docs. 1, 17 22. The R&R recommends that the Court deny the Petition. Doc. 22 at 23. The Magistrate 18 Judge advised the parties that they had fourteen days to file objections to the R&R and that 19 failure to file timely objections could be considered a waiver of the right to obtain review of 20 the R&R1. Id. at 23 (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 21 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003)). 22 The parties did not file objections, which relieves the Court of its obligation to review 23 the R&R. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121; Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) 24 (“[Section 636(b)(1)] does not . . . require any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the 25 subject of an objection.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must determine de 26 novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly objected to.”). The 27 28 1 The Court further extended the deadline to file an objection and/or response to the R&R until March 19, 2012 (Doc. 27). 1 Court has nonetheless reviewed the R&R and finds that it is well-taken. The Court will 2 accept the R&R and deny the Petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that the district 3 court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations 4 made by the magistrate”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge may accept, reject, 5 or modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the 6 magistrate judge with instructions.”). 7 IT IS ORDERED: 8 1. Magistrate Judge Aspey’s R&R (Doc.22) is ACCEPTED. 9 2. Petitioner’s petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED WITH 10 PREJUDICE. 11 3. The Clerk of Court shall TERMINATE this action. 12 4. Pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, in the event 13 Petitioner files an appeal, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability because 14 reasonable jurists would not find the Court’s procedural ruling debatable. See Slack v. 15 McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). 16 DATED this 27th day of March, 2012. 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?