Shakur v. Ryan et al

Filing 15

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 14 and DENYING petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus (doc. 1). DENYING a certificate of appealability because petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. The Clerk shall enter judgment. Signed by Judge Frederick J Martone on 4/3/12. (DMT)

1

WO

2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

Khalil Shakur,

)
)
Petitioner,
)
)
vs.
)
)
)
Charles L. Ryan; Attorney General of the)
State of Arizona,
)
)
Respondents.
)
)
)

CV 11-02169-PHX-FJM
ORDER

15
The court has before it petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28
16
U.S.C. § 2254 (doc. 1), respondents' response (doc. 11), and petitioner's reply (doc. 13). We
17
also have the report and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge
18
recommending that the petition be denied (doc. 14). Petitioner did not object to the report
19
and recommendation, and the time for doing so has expired. After review, we accept the
20
recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Rule 8(b), Rules
21
Governing § 2254 Cases. See also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th
22

Cir. 2003).1

23
24
25
26
27
28

1

After the report and recommendation was filed, the Supreme Court decided Martinez
v. Ryan, __ U.S. __, __ S. Ct. __, 2012 WL 912950 (Mar. 20, 2012). Martinez does not alter
the analysis in this case, however, because petitioner raised an ineffective assistance of
counsel claim in his state action for post-conviction relief that was decided on the merits.
The magistrate judge did not conclude that petitioner procedurally defaulted on this claim,
but rather determined that the state court's denial of relief was neither clearly contrary to nor
an unreasonable application of federal law.

1

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED ACCEPTING the report and recommendation (doc.

2

14) and DENYING petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus (doc. 1).

3

FURTHER ORDERED DENYING a certificate of appealability because petitioner has not

4

made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. The Clerk shall enter

5

judgment.

6

DATED this 3rd day of April, 2012.

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-

IT IS