Cebreros-Sanchez v. USA
Filing
32
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION granting 31 Motion for Ruling and adopting 28 Report and Recommendation. the Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody (Doc. 1 ) is denied and Petitioner's request for an evidentiary hearing is denied. Any request for a Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis is denied because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. The Clerk shall terminate this action and enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge Diane J Humetewa on 9/24/24. (DXD)
1
WO
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
8
9
Jose Ramon Cebreros-Sanchez,
Petitioner,
10
No. CV-21-01799-PHX-DJH
No. CR-16-01202-PHX-DJH-1
ORDER
11
v.
12
United States of America,
13
Respondent.
14
15
Before the Court is Petitioner Jose Ramon Cebreros-Sanchez’s Motion Under 28
16
U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody
17
(the “§ 2255 Motion”) (Doc. 1) and the January 23, 2023, Report and Recommendation
18
(“R&R”) issued by Magistrate Judge Eileen S. Willett (Doc. 28). In her R&R, Judge
19
Willett recommends the § 2255 Motion be denied without an evidentiary hearing. (Id. at
20
20). She also recommends that a Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed in
21
forma pauperis be denied because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the
22
denial of a constitutional right. (Id.)
23
On February 21, 2023, Petitioner filed a one-page objection to the R&R (Doc. 29)
24
in which he asserts that the R&R did not address one of the six grounds he raised in his
25
§ 2255 Motion. Specifically, Petitioner says the R&R failed to address his argument that
26
his counsel’s performance was constitutionally deficient for failing to raise the argument
27
that the jury had not found drug quantities that impacted the statutory maximum and
28
mandatory minimum sentence that he received. (Id.) The Government filed a Response
1
to Petitioner’s objection (Doc. 30) that points out that the R&R addresses Petitioner’s
2
argument at length on pages 14–16.
3
The Court has reviewed the comprehensive R&R and agrees with the Government.
4
The R&R not only addresses Petitioner’s § 2255 argument, it makes a sound
5
recommendation as to why Petitioner’s trial and appellate counsel were not deficient in
6
failing to challenge the sentence on appeal. (See Doc. 28 at 15–16 (finding that the
7
Court’s sentence comported with the Sixth Amendment because “the jury in this case
8
found beyond a reasonable doubt that Count 1 involved more than 500 grams of
9
methamphetamine” and “the Court did not impose sentences on Counts 1 and 2 that
10
exceeded the statutory maximum”)). The Court will, therefore, overrule Petitioner’s
11
objection, accept the R&R, and dismiss the Petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (“A
12
judge of the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
13
recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3) (same).
14
Accordingly,
15
IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for Ruling (Doc. 31) is granted as
16
stated herein. Magistrate Judge Willett’s R&R (Doc. 28) is accepted and adopted as the
17
Order of this Court.
18
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to
19
Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody (Doc. 1) is denied
20
and Petitioner’s request for an evidentiary hearing is denied.
21
Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis is denied
22
because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional
23
right.
24
///
25
///
26
///
27
///
28
///
-2-
Any request for a
1
2
3
IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall terminate this action
and enter judgment accordingly.
Dated this 24th day of September, 2024.
4
5
6
7
Honorable Diane J. Humetewa
United States District Judge
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-
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?