Bentley v. Ryan, et. al
Filing
22
ORDER ADOPTING 21 Magistrate Judge Fine's Report and Recommendation. Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1 ) is denied and dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk shall terminate this action. Pursuant 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 Court's procedural ruling debatable. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 2/21/17. (LSP)
1
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
8
9
Steve Ray Bentley,
Petitioner,
10
11
ORDER
v.
12
No. CV-16-00938-PHX-GMS
Charles L. Ryan, et al.,
13
Respondents.
14
15
Pending before the Court are Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and
16
United States Magistrate Judge Deborah M. Fine’s Report and Recommendation
17
(“R&R”). Docs. 1, 21. The R&R recommends that the Court deny and dismiss the
18
Petition with prejudice. Doc. 21 at 16. The Magistrate Judge advised the parties that
19
they had fourteen days to file objections to the R&R and that failure to file timely
20
objections could be considered a waiver of the right to obtain review of the R&R. Id. at
21
17 (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, 6(a), 6(b); United States v. Reyna-
22
Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th 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 and dismiss the Petition 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 Fine’s R&R (Doc. 21) is accepted.
9
2.
Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) is denied and
10
11
12
13
14
dismissed with prejudice.
3.
4.
The Clerk of Court shall terminate this action.
Pursuant 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 Court’s procedural ruling debatable. See
15
16
17
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).
Dated this 21st day of February, 2017.
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?