Morgal v. Ryan et al

Filing 33

ORDER AND DENIAL OF CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY - IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. 25 ) is accepted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court enter judgment denying and dismissing petit ioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1 ). The Clerk shall terminate this action. Having considered the issuance of a Certificate of Appealability from the order denying Petitioner's Peti tion for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, and Petitioner's Request for Certificate of Appealability (Doc. 30 ) the Court FINDS: Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal are Denied. With regard to Counts 4 and 9, the Petition lacks a substantial question. All other counts are procedurally defaulted. Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 2/20/13. (LAD)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Allan Kenneth Morgal,

10

Petitioner,

11

vs.

12

Charles L. Ryan, et al.,

13

No. CV-11-02552-PHX-NVW
ORDER
AND DENIAL OF
CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

Respondents.

14
15

Pending before the court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of

16

Magistrate Judge Bridget S. Bade (Doc. 25) regarding petitioner’s Petition for Writ of

17

Habeas Corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1). The R&R recommends that

18

the Petition be denied and dismissed. The Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they

19

had fourteen days to file objections to the R&R. (R&R at P. 32 (citing 28 U.S.C. §

20

636(b)). Upon Motion of the Petitioner, the Court further extended the deadline for

21

objections until February 22, 2013 (Doc. 27). Petitioner filed objections on February 11,

22

2013 (Doc. 28).

23

The court has considered the objections and reviewed the Report and

24

Recommendation de novo. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that

25

the court must make a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and

26

Recommendation to which specific objections are made). The court agrees with the

27

Magistrate Judge’s determinations, accepts the recommended decision within the

28

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

meaning of Rule 72(b), Fed. R. Civ. P., and overrules Petitioner’s objections. See 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that the district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole
or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate”).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Report and Recommendation of the
Magistrate Judge (Doc. 25) is accepted.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court enter judgment denying
and dismissing petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 2254 (Doc. 1). The Clerk shall terminate this action.
Having considered the issuance of a Certificate of Appealability from the order
denying Petitioner’s Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, and Petitioner’s Request for
Certificate of Appealability (Doc. 30) the Court FINDS: Certificate of Appealability and
leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal are Denied. With regard to Counts 4 and 9,
the Petition lacks a substantial question. All other counts are procedurally defaulted.
Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.
Dated this 20th day of February, 2013.

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2