Wall v. Attorney General of the State of Arizona

Filing 18

ORDER that the Magistrate Judges Report and Recommendation 17 is ACCEPTED; accordingly, Petitioner's Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 5 is denied and dismissed with prejudice, that pursuant to Rule 11 of the Rules Governing Sec tion 2254 Cases, in the event Petitioner files an appeal, the Court denies issuance of a certificate of appealability because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, see 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), and the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment of dismissal with prejudice. Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 11/13/2014. (ALS)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

)
)
)
Petitioner,
)
)
vs.
)
)
Attorney General Of the State of Arizona,)
)
et al.,
)
)
Respondent.
)
)
Emmet Darnell Wall,

No. CV 13-1275-PHX-JAT
ORDER

16

Pending before the Court is Petitioner’s Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

17

(“Petition”) (Doc. 5). The Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”)

18

(Doc. 17) recommending that the Petition be denied.

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 ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 17)

28

is ACCEPTED; accordingly,

1

•

2
3

Petitioner’s Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 5) is denied
and dismissed with prejudice,

•

that pursuant to Rule 11 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, in the

4

event Petitioner files an appeal, the Court denies issuance of a certificate of

5

appealability because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the

6

denial of a constitutional right, see 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), and

7

•

the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment of dismissal with prejudice.

8

DATED this 13th day of November, 2014.

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