Ramos-Perez v. Ryan et al

Filing 15

ORDER ADOPTING 14 Magistrate Judge Duncan's Report and Recommendation. Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. A Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appea l are DENIED because the dismissal of the Petition is justified by the waiver contained in the plea agreement of all non- jurisdictional claims and reasonable jurists would not find the ruling debatable. The Clerk shall terminate this case. Signed by Judge Douglas L Rayes on 4/27/17. (LSP)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Guillermo Ramos-Perez,

10

Petitioner,

11

ORDER

v.

12

No. CV-16-00813-PHX-DLR

Charles L Ryan, et al.,

13

Respondents.

14
15
16

Before the Court is Petitioner Guillermo Ramos-Perez’s Petition for Writ of

17

Habeas Corpus and United States Magistrate Judge David K. Duncan’s Report and

18

Recommendation (R&R). (Docs. 1, 14.) The R&R recommends that the Court deny the

19

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

20

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

21

waiver of the right to obtain review of the R&R. (Doc. 14 at 6 (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72;

22

United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003)). Petitioner did not

23

file objections, which relieves the Court of its obligation to review the R&R. See Reyna-

24

Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121; Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (“[Section 636(b)(1)]

25

does not . . . require any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an

26

objection.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must determine de novo any

27

part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly objected to.”). The Court

28

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

1

the R&R and deny the Petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that the district court

2

“may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations

3

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

4

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

5

the magistrate judge with instructions.”).

6

IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Duncan’s R&R (Doc. 14) is

7

ACCEPTED.

8

DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED and

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 the waiver contained in the plea agreement of all non-jurisdictional claims

12

and reasonable jurists would not find the ruling debatable.

13
14
15

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall terminate this
case.
Dated this 27th day of April, 2017.

16
17
18
19
20

Douglas L. Rayes
United States District Judge

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-