Bowman #254828 v. Ryan et al

Filing 19

ORDER that Magistrate Judge Burn's R&R (Doc. 18 ) is accepted and adopted as the order of this Court. FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1 ) is denied and dismissed with prejudic e. FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, a Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal are denied because dismissal of the Petition is justified by a plain procedural bar and jurists of reason would not find the procedural ruling debatable, and Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall terminate this action and enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge Diane J Humetewa on 7/28/2015. (KMG)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Justin C. Bowman,

No. CV-14-0733-PHX-DJH
Petitioner,

10
11

v.

12

ORDER

Charles L. Ryan, et al.,

13

Respondents.

14
15
16

This matter is before the Court on Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

17

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1) and the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”)

18

issued by United States Magistrate Judge Michelle H. Burns (Doc. 18). Following a jury

19

trial in 2010, Petitioner was convicted of 32 criminal counts involving sexual offenses

20

with minors. (Doc. 18 at 3). He was sentenced to concurrent and consecutive prison

21

terms totaling 682 years. (Id.). He raised ten grounds for relief in the Petition, including

22

two Confrontation Clause violations, three Due Process Clause violations, and five

23

claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel in violation of the Sixth Amendment.

24

(Doc. 18 at 1-2).

25

Petitioner's first two claims lack merit and the remaining eight claims are procedurally

26

defaulted. (Doc. 18 at 19-20). Accordingly, Judge Burns recommends the Petition be

27

denied. (Doc. 18 at 20).

28

///

After consideration of the issues, Judge Burns concluded that

1

Judge Burns advised the parties that they had fourteen days to file objections and

2

that the failure to file timely objections "may result in the acceptance of the Report and

3

Recommendation by the district court without further review." (Doc. 18 at 20) (citing

4

United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc)). The

5

parties have not filed objections and the time to do so has expired.

6

objections, the Court is not required to review the findings and recommendations in the

7

R&R. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1989) (The relevant provision of the

8

Federal Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), “does not on its face require any

9

review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.”); Reyna-Tapia, 328

10

F.3d at 1121 (same); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must determine de novo

11

any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly objected to.”).

Absent any

12

Nonetheless, the Court has reviewed the R&R and agrees with its findings and

13

recommendations. The Court will, therefore, accept the R&R and deny the Petition. See

14

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) (“A judge of the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole

15

or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”);

16

Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3) (same).

17

Accordingly,

18

IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Burn's R&R (Doc. 18) is accepted and

19

adopted as the order of this Court.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

20
21

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1) is denied and dismissed with prejudice.

22

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing

23

Section 2254 Cases, a Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis

24

on appeal are denied because dismissal of the Petition is justified by a plain procedural

25

bar and jurists of reason would not find the procedural ruling debatable, and Petitioner

26

has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.

27

///

28

///

-2-

1
2
3

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall terminate this action
and enter judgment accordingly.
Dated this 28th day of July, 2015.

4
5
6
7

Honorable Diane J. Humetewa
United States District Judge

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

-3-