Taylor v. USA

Filing 10

ORDER - IT IS ORDERED that Movant's Motion for Article III Judge and Removal of Magistrate Judge is denied. (Doc. 6.) (See document for further details). Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 1/18/13. (LAD)

1
2

SC

WO

3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

United States of America,
Plaintiff,

10
11

v.

12

Janice Sue Taylor,
Defendant/Movant.

13
14

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. CV 12-1666-PHX-DGC (BSB)
No. CR 10-0400-PHX-DGC
ORDER

15

Movant Janice Sue Taylor, who is confined in the Federal Prison Camp in Bryan,

16

Texas, filed a pro se Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal

17

Custody pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. In an Order filed on November 13, 2012, the Court

18

ordered a response to the Motion and referred the matter to Magistrate Judge Bridget S. Bade

19

for a report and recommendation. (Doc. 3.) On December 18, 2012, Movant filed a motion

20

captioned as “Motion for Article III Judge and Removal of Magistrate Judge.” (Doc. 6.)

21

That motion will be denied.

22

Movant asks that an Article III judge be assigned to her § 2255 proceedings. Movant

23

also states that she does not consent to her § 2255 motion being referred to a magistrate

24

judge.

25

As an initial matter, Movant’s § 2255 motion is before the undersigned, who is an

26

Article III judge. A district judge may designate a magistrate judge to submit to him

27

proposed findings of fact and recommendations for the disposition of applications for post-

28

trial relief made by individuals convicted of criminal offenses, such as Movant. 28 U.S.C.

1

§ 636(b)(1)(B). Further, under this District’s Local Rules, habeas corpus petitions are

2

assigned to a district court judge and referred to a magistrate judge. LRCiv. 3.7(e). Consent

3

of a § 2255 movant is not required.

4

When a § 2255 motion is referred to a magistrate judge, the magistrate judge considers

5

the parties’ filings and issues a report and recommendation to this Court. The parties are

6

afforded the opportunity to make objections to the report and recommendation. This Court

7

will consider the parties’ objections, if any, and will determine whether to adopt or reject the

8

report and recommendation. Thus, this Court, not Magistrate Judge Bade, will decide

9

whether to grant or deny Movant relief after affording Movant an opportunity to raise

10

objections. Movant’s motion will be denied.

11

Warnings

12

A.

Address Changes

13

Movant must file and serve a notice of a change of address in accordance with Rule

14

83.3(d) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure. Movant must not include a motion for other

15

relief with a notice of change of address. Failure to comply may result in dismissal of this

16

action.

17

B.

Copies

18

Movant must serve Respondent, or counsel if an appearance has been entered, a copy

19

of every document that he files. Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(a). Each filing must include a certificate

20

stating that a copy of the filing was served. Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(d). Also, Movant must submit

21

an additional copy of every filing for use by the Court. LRCiv 5.4. Failure to comply may

22

result in the filing being stricken without further notice to Movant.

23

C.

24

If Movant fails to timely comply with every provision of this Order, including these

25

warnings, the Court may dismiss this action without further notice. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet,

26

963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992) (a district court may dismiss an action for failure to

27

comply with any order of the Court).

28

/

/

Possible Dismissal

/
-2-

1
2
3

IT IS ORDERED that Movant’s Motion for Article III Judge and Removal of
Magistrate Judge is denied. (Doc. 6.)
DATED this 18th day of January, 2013.

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-