Coleman v. Ryan et al
Filing
12
ORDER that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 9 ) is accepted and adopted by the Court. 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 (Doc. 1 ) is Denied and that this action is dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no certificate of appealability shall be issued and that the petitioner is not entitled to appeal in forma pauperis because dismissal of the Petition is justified by a plain procedural bar and reasonable jurists would not find the procedural ruling debatable. Signed by Senior Judge Paul G Rosenblatt on 4/12/2016. (KMG)
1
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
8
9
10
Ernest Lee Coleman,
Petitioner,
11
12
ORDER
v.
13
No. CV-14-02432-PHX-PGR
Charles L. Ryan, et al.,
14
Respondents.
15
16
The Court having reviewed de novo the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 9) of
17
Magistrate Judge John Z. Boyle, filed on December 15, 2015, notwithstanding that no
18
party has filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation,
19
20
IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc.
9) is accepted and adopted by the Court.
21
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petitioner’s Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254
22
for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody (Doc. 1) is Denied and that this
23
action is dismissed with prejudice.
24
accordingly.
25
///
26
///
27
28
///
The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment
1
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no certificate of appealability shall be issued
2
and that the petitioner is not entitled to appeal in forma pauperis because dismissal of the
3
Petition is justified by a plain procedural bar and reasonable jurists would not find the
4
procedural ruling debatable.
5
Dated this 12th day of April, 2016.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-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?