Camacho v. Ryan

Filing 16

ORDER Magistrate Judge Duncan's R&R (Doc. 15 ) is accepted. Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1 ) is denied and dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of Court shall terminate this action and enter judgment accordingly. P ursuant 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 ourt's procedural ruling debatable. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 7/20/2016. (KMG)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Luis Avelino Camacho, 10 Petitioner, 11 ORDER v. 12 No. CV-16-00513-PHX-GMS Charles L. Ryan, 13 Respondent. 14 15 Pending before the Court are Plaintiff’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and 16 United States Magistrate Judge David K. Duncan’s Report and Recommendation 17 (“R&R”). Docs. 1, 15. The R&R recommends that the Court deny the Petition and 18 dismiss with prejudice. Doc. 7 at 15. The Magistrate Judge advised the parties that they 19 had fourteen days to file objections to the R&R and that failure to file timely objections 20 could be considered a waiver of the right to obtain review of the R&R. Id. at 16 (citing 21 Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, 6(a), 6(b); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th 22 Cir. 2003)). 23 The parties did not file objections, which relieves the Court of its obligation to 24 review the R&R. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121; Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 25 (1985) (“[Section 636(b)(1)] does not . . . require any review at all . . . of any issue that is 26 not the subject of an objection.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must 27 determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly 28 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 with prejudice. 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 Duncan’s R&R (Doc. 15) is accepted. 9 2. Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is denied and 10 11 12 13 dismissed with prejudice. 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 20th day of July, 2016. 18 19 20 Honorable G. Murray Snow United States District Judge 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?