Harris v. Ryan et al

Filing 15

ORDER - The Magistrate Judge's 14 Report and Recommendation is accepted and adopted by the Court. The petitioner's Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody is denied as time-barred an d is dismissed with prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no certificate of appealability shall issue and that leave to appeal in forma pauperis is denied because dismissal of the habeas petition is justified by a plain procedural bar and jurists of reason would not find the procedural ruling debatable. the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Senior Judge Paul G Rosenblatt on 12/14/2015. (ATD)

Download PDF
1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Dwayne Gregory Harris, 10 Petitioner, 11 vs. 12 Charles L. Ryan, et al., 13 Respondents. 14 15 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CV-14-01741-PHX-PGR (MHB) ORDER 16 Having reviewed de novo the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge 17 Burns notwithstanding that no party has filed any objection to the Report and 18 Recommendation, the Court finds that the Magistrate Judge correctly determined that the 19 petitioner’s habeas petition, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, should be dismissed with 20 prejudice as time-barred inasmuch as it was filed over two years after the expiration of the 21 one-year statute of limitations of the AEDPA and the petitioner has made no showing that 22 the limitations period should be equitably tolled. Therefore, 23 24 25 26 IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 14) is accepted and adopted by the Court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petitioner’s Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody is denied as time-barred and 1 is dismissed with prejudice. 2 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no certificate of appealability shall issue and that 3 leave to appeal in forma pauperis is denied because dismissal of the habeas petition is 4 justified by a plain procedural bar and jurists of reason would not find the procedural ruling 5 debatable. 6 7 8 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly. DATED this 14th day of December, 2015. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 -2-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?