Guevara v. Ryan et al

Filing 15

ORDER ADOPTING 14 Magistrate Judge Bade's Report and Recommendation. Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1 ) is denied and dismissed as untimely. The Clerk of Court shall terminate this action and enter judgment. Pur suant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, in the event Petitioner files an appeal, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability because reasonable jurists would not find the Courts procedural ruling debatable. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 5/28/15. (KGM)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Robert P. Guevara,

No. CV-14-01432-PHX-GMS
Petitioner,

10
11

v.

12

ORDER

Charles L. Ryan, et al.,

13

Respondents.

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Pending before the Court are Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and
United States Magistrate Judge Bridget S. Bade’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”).
Docs. 1, 14. The R&R recommends that the Court deny the Petition and dismiss as
untimely. Doc. 14 at 9. The Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they had fourteen
days to file objections to the R&R and that failure to file timely objections could be
considered a waiver of the right to obtain review of the R&R. Id. at 16 (citing Fed. R.
Civ. P. 72, 6(a), 6(b); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir.
2003)).
The parties did not file objections, which relieves the Court of its obligation to
review the R&R. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121; Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149
(1985) (“[Section 636(b)(1)] does not . . . require any review at all . . . of any issue that is
not the subject of an objection.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must
determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly
objected to.”). The Court has nonetheless reviewed the R&R and finds that it is well-

1

taken. The Court will accept the R&R and deny the Petition and dismiss as untimely.

2

See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that the district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in

3

whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate”); Fed. R. Civ.

4

P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended

5

disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with

6

instructions.”).

7

IT IS ORDERED:

8

1.

Magistrate Judge Bade’s R&R (Doc. 18) is accepted.

9

2.

Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is denied and

10
11
12
13

dismissed as untimely.
3.

The Clerk of Court shall terminate this action and enter judgment

accordingly.
4.

Pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, in the

14

event Petitioner files an appeal, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability

15

because reasonable jurists would not find the Court’s procedural ruling debatable. See

16

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).

17

Dated this 28th day of May, 2015.

18
19
20

Honorable G. Murray Snow
United States District Judge

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-