Solomon v. Ryan et al

Filing 16

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION as to 15 Report and Recommendation. Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1 ) is DISMISSED with prejudice. The Clerk shall terminate this case. Signed by Judge Douglas L Rayes on 7/31/18. (DXD)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Garrick Solomon,
Petitioner,

10
11

ORDER

v.

12

No. CV-17-04508-PHX-DLR

Charles L Ryan, et al.,

13

Respondents.

14
15

Before the Court is Petitioner Garrick Solomon’s Petition for Writ of Habeas

16

Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and United States Magistrate Judge James F.

17

Metcalf’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”). (Docs. 1, 15.) The R&R recommends

18

that the Court deny the Petition and dismiss with prejudice because it is barred by the

19

habeas statute of limitations, and Ground 1’s exclusionary rule claim is not cognizable on

20

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

21

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

22

waiver of the right to obtain review of the R&R. See United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328

23

F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). Petitioner did not file objections, which relieves the

24

Court of its obligation to review the R&R. See Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d at 1121; Thomas

25

v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (“[Section 636(b)(1)] does not . . . require any review at

26

all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an objection.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3)

27

(“The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s

28

disposition that has been properly objected to.”). The Court has nonetheless reviewed the

1

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

2

and dismiss with prejudice. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (stating that the district court

3

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

4

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

5

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

6

the magistrate judge with instructions.”).

7

IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge MetCalf’s R&R (Doc. 15) is

8

ACCEPTED. Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1.) is DISMISSED

9

with prejudice. The Clerk of the Court shall terminate this case.

10

Dated this 31st day of July, 2018.

11
12
13
14
15

Douglas L. Rayes
United States District Judge

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-