Gomez-Ochoa v. Lynch et al

Filing 27

ORDER accepting the 26 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Bade. IT IS ORDERED denying and dismissing the 22 Amended Petition in this matter and instructing the Clerk to close the matter. See document for details. Signed by Judge John J Tuchi on 03/06/2017. (ATD)

Download PDF
1 NOT FOR PUBLICATION 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Carlos Gomez-Ochoa, Petitioner, 10 11 ORDER v. 12 No. CV-16-01646-PHX-JJT (BSB) Loretta E Lynch, et al., 13 Respondents. 14 15 At issue is Magistrate Judge Bridget S. Bade’s Report and Recommendation 16 (R&R) in this matter filed February 8, 2017 (Doc. 26). The R&R recommends that the 17 Court deny Carlos Gomez-Ochoa’s Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 18 (Doc. 22). The R&R clearly advised Petitioner that he had fourteen days from the date of 19 service of a copy of the R&R to file any specific written objections. Fed. R. Civ. Pr. 72. 20 Petitioner filed no objections, and the time to do so is now long past. Petitioner has 21 therefore waived his right to de novo consideration of the issues per United States v. 22 Rayna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1141, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003)(en banc), and the Court may accept the 23 R&R without further review. Nonetheless, the Court has conducted a review on the 24 merits of the issues involved. It finds that Magistrate Judge Bade’s reasoning and analysis 25 are correctly applied to the procedural situation. 26 Petitioner challenges the Immigration Judge’s (IJ’s) decisions at bond 27 redetermination hearings involving Petitioner in January and September 2016, arguing 28 that his procedural due process rights were violated at each hearing. (Doc. 22.) As Judge 1 Bade correctly concluded and recommended, Petitioner has failed to exhaust his 2 administrative remedies with respect to the September 2016 hearing, which is still on 3 appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) and it is thus not properly before this 4 Court. Even if Petitioner’s claim regarding the September 2016 IJ hearing were properly 5 exhausted, however, it, like the claim involving the January 2016 IJ hearing, would fail. 6 As Judge Bade set forth in the R&R, Petitioner received Rodriguez hearings, thus 7 satisfying the procedural due process requirements, and in those hearings the IJ set forth 8 multi-faceted justifications for the IJ’s rulings that properly considered not only 9 Petitioner’s criminal history but risk to the community and other required factors in the 10 calculus. The Court, for all of the above reasons, will deny and dismiss the Amended 11 Petition. 12 13 14 IT IS ORDERED denying and dismissing the Amended Petition in this matter (Doc. 22) and instructing the Clerk to close the matter. Dated this 6th day of March, 2017. 15 16 17 Honorable John J. Tuchi United States District Judge 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?