Salazar #207963 v. Ryan et al

Filing 17

ORDER that Magistrate Judge Boyle's R&R, Doc. 16 , is ACCEPTED. Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, Doc. 1 , is DENIED and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. FURTHER ORDERED that a Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal are DENIED because the dismissal of the Petition is justified by a plain procedural bar and reasonable jurists would not find the ruling debatable, and because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall terminate this case. Signed by Judge Douglas L Rayes on 6/6/2016. (KMG)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Marco Antonio Salazar,

10

Petitioner,

11

ORDER

v.

12

No. CV-15-02083-PHX-DLR

Charles L Ryan, et al.,

13

Respondents.

14
15
16

Before the Court is Petitioner Marco A. Salazar’s Petition for Writ of Habeas

17

Corpus and United States Magistrate Judge John Z. Boyle’s Report and Recommendation

18

(R&R). Docs. 1, 16. The R&R recommends that the Court deny the Petition. Doc. 16 at

19

5. The Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they had fourteen days to file objections

20

to the R&R and that failure to file timely objections could be considered a waiver of the

21

right to obtain review of the R&R. Id. at 6 (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72; United States v.

22

Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003)).

23

which relieves the Court of its obligation to review the R&R. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d

24

at 1121; Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (“[Section 636(b)(1)] does not . . .

25

require any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.”); Fed. R.

26

Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate

27

judge’s disposition that has been properly objected to.”). The Court has nonetheless

28

reviewed the R&R and finds that it is well-taken. The Court will accept the R&R and

Petitioner did not file objections,

1

deny the Petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that the district court “may accept,

2

reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the

3

magistrate”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge may accept, reject, or modify

4

the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the

5

magistrate judge with instructions.”).

6

IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Boyle’s R&R, Doc. 16, is ACCEPTED.

7

Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, Doc. 1, is DENIED and DISMISSED

8

WITH PREJUDICE.

9

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a Certificate of Appealability and leave to

10

proceed in forma pauperis on appeal are DENIED because the dismissal of the Petition is

11

justified by a plain procedural bar and reasonable jurists would not find the ruling

12

debatable, and because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a

13

constitutional right.

14
15
16

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall terminate this
case.
Dated this 6th day of June, 2016.

17
18
19
20
21

Douglas L. Rayes
United States District Judge

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-